Inductive vs. deductive reasoning
Unlike deductive arguments, inductive reasoning allows for
the possibility that the conclusion is false, even if all of the
premises are true. Instead of being valid or invalid, inductive arguments are
either strong or weak, which describes how probable it is that the conclusion
is true.
A classical example of an incorrect inductive argument
was presented by John Vickers:
All of the swans we have seen are white.
Therefore, all swans are white.
Now, let us see what we will call the UFO inductive
reasoning:
Most of the so
called Unidentified Flying Objects ( UFO) are identified as natural phenomena
and /or human made artifacts.
Some of the UFO
however, remain not identified, consequently these Unidentified Flying Objects
are extraterrestrial vehicles.
As we can see this inductive argument allows the
possibility that the conclusion is false. That is why Inductive reasoning is
also known as hypothesis construction. The conclusion is unreliable so at most
we can talk about a hypothetical conclusion, but not a factual one.
David Hume, the Scottish philosopher; described the
problems of inductive reasoning in his An
Enquiry concerning Human Understanding, based on his epistemological framework. Here,
"reason" refers only to deductive reasoning and "induction"
refers to inductive reasoning.
