BITS College

Chapter Two
1.3 Deduction and Induction
A deductive argument is an argument in which the arguer claims that it is impossible for
the conclusion to be false given that the premises are true.
In such arguments the conclusion is claimed to follow necessarily from the premises.
An inductive argument is an argument in which the arguer claims that it is improbable
that that the conclusion be false given that the premises are true. In these arguments
the conclusion is claimed to follow only probably from the premises.
Thus, deductive arguments are those that involve necessary reasoning, and inductive
arguments are those that involve probabilistic reasoning.
Example:
All human beings are mortal.
Socrates is a human being.
Therefore, Socrates is mortal(Deductive

Most human beings are mortal.

Socrates is a human being.
Therefore, probably Socrates is mortal.

The distinction between inductive and deductive arguments lies in the strength of an
argument’s inferential claim. Three criteria that influence our decision about this claim
are(1) the occurrence of special indicator
Words, (2) the actual strength of the inferential link between the premises and the conclusion, and (3) the
form or style of argumentation the arguer uses.
1. Indicator words
The words “probably,” “improbable,” “plausible,” “implausible,” “likely,”
“unlikely,” and “reasonable to conclude” are all inductive indicators.
The words “necessarily,” “certainly,” “absolutely,” “definitely” are all deductive indicators.
2. The actual strength of the inferential link between premises and conclusion. If the conclusion follows
with strict necessity from the premises, the argument is deductive. If the conclusion does not follow with
strict necessity but does follow probably, it is best to consider the argument as inductive. Examples:
All saleswomen are extroverts.
Elizabeth Taylor is a saleswoman.
Therefore, Elizabeth Taylor is an extrovert.

The vast majority of saleswoman are extroverts.

Elizabeth Taylor is a saleswoman.
Therefore, Elizabeth Taylor is an extrovert.
3. Forms or styles of argumentation the arguer uses.
Typically deductive forms of argumentations
An argument based on mathematics is an argument in which the conclusion depends on
some purely arithmetic or geometric measurement. Example:
A surveyor might measure a square piece of land and after determining that it is 100 feet
on each side, conclude that it contains 10,000 square feet.
An argument from definition is an argument in which the conclusion is claimed to
depend merely upon the definition of a word or phrase used in the premise.
Example:
Because Claudia is mendacious, she tells lies.
Categorical syllogism is a syllogism in which each statement begins with one of the
words “all,” “no,” or “some”. Example:
All lasers are optical devices.
Some lasers are surgical instruments.
Therefore, some optical devices are surgical instruments.
A hypothetical syllogism is a syllogism having a conditional statement for one or both
of its premises. Examples:
If electricity flows through a conductor, then a magnetic field is produced. If a magnetic
field is produced, then a nearby compass will be deflected. Therefore, if electricity
flows through a conductor, then a nearby compass will be deflected.
Disjunctive syllogism is a syllogism having a disjunctive statement(i.e., an “either…
or…” statement) for one of its premises. Example:
Either a breach of a contract is a crime or it is not punishable by the state. Breach of a
contract is not a crime. Therefore, it is not punishable by the state.
An inductive forms of argumentations
A Prediction is an argument that proceeds from our knowledge of the
Past to make a claim about the future. Example, because a certain meteorological
phenomena have been observed over Addis Ababa on Monday, rain will occur there in
the same day.
An argument from analogy is an argument that depends on the existence of an
analogy, or similarity, between two things or states of affairs. Example:
David’s new Chevrolet is bright blue, has a ring antenna and takes an excellent gas
mileage. John’s Chevrolet is also bright blue and has a ring antenna. Therefore, John’s
Chevrolet must take an excellent gas mileage.
A generalization is an argument that proceeds from the knowledge of a selected sample
to some claim about the whole group. Example, because three oranges selected
randomly from a bag were tasty and
Juicy, all the oranges from the bag are tasty and juicy.
An argument from authority is an argument that concludes something is true because
an expert or witness said that it is. Example, a lawyer might argue that Mack
committed the murder because an eyewitness testified to that effect under oath.
An argument based on signs is an argument that proceeds from a knowledge of a
certain sign to the things that the sign symbolizes. Example, because the sign on the
road says the road makes several sharp turns after two kilometers, the road indeed….
A causal inference is an argument that proceeds from the knowledge of the cause to
knowledge of an effect and conversely, from effect to cause. Example, because a
bottle of wine had been left in the freezer overnight, it had froze.