FOUN1201 Science, Medicine and Technology in Society

Topic 2 , Unit 2.1

Induction and Deduction

Dr. Sylvia Adjoa Mitchell

The Biotechnology Centre
University of the West Indies
Mona Campus
FOUN1201 – Science, Medicine &
Technology in Society

Administrative Co-ordinator:
INTRODUCTION
Mrs. Nadine McEwan, FST office, UWI Mona
[email protected]

Academic Co-ordinator:
Dr. Deiondra Robinson-Tai, Asst Lecturer,
The Biotechnology Centre, UWI Mona
[email protected]

FOUN1201 Text Book: In Vle container

INDUCTION AND DEDUCTION
Objectives: After completing this section you should be able to
a) Give similarities & differences - Induction & Deduction

b) INDUCTION:
– Definition
– Examples – everyday/general & in science (SM)
– Understand terms: strong / weak, reliable / unreliable
– Understand how validity can be increased
– Limitations using inductive reasoning in scientific method

c) DEDUCTION
– Definition
– Examples - everyday/general & in science (SM)
– Understand terms: valid / invalid, sound / unsound
– Limitations using deductive reasoning in scientific method

d) COMPARE contribution of induction & deduction to scientific

progress through history.
 What is Science?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiTVkCy7DwA&t=186s
1809 - Humphry Davy, an English
chemist, invented the first electric
light.
1879 - Thomas Edison invented a
carbon filament that burned for
forty hours. Edison evolved his
designs for the lightbulb based on
the 1875 patent he purchased from
inventors, Henry Woodward, and
Matthew Evans. By 1880 his bulbs
lasted 600 hours and were reliable
enough to become a marketable
enterprise.
Scientific Truth
What is Scientific Truth?

https://www.youtube.com/watch
?v=AqBTNZi13f4
How do we find ‘truth’? There are two ways
⚫ We reason by argument, using what we know by
observation to what we are trying to find out
(INDUCTION) OR apply a known ‘truth’ (DEDUCTION).
⚫ INDUCTION: Uses a sample (members of a
population) to reach a conclusion about a
population. Eg Asking a sample of farmers (by
questionnaires) in Jamaica to determine how
Jamaican farmers coped with the recent drought.
⚫ DEDUCTION: Uses what is known about a population
to determine what one member is like ‘All Jamaicans
have a Jamaican passport’, since I am Jamaican, I
have a passport
Induction & Deduction - reason using an argument
What is reasoning?
⚫ The power of the mind to think, understand, and form judgements
⚫ By reasoning, the next in a sequence can be worked out.
⚫ One needs the capacity to reason in order to think logically
⚫ We use logic to reason within an argument as we attempt to link
one idea to a related idea.

Ability to reason

To go from one idea to another

Ranking

Analogy Arguments
Arrangements
Sequences

https://mconsultingprep.com/deductive-
reasoning-tests-ultimate-guide
Reasoning
⚫ Reason is the means by which rational beings
understand cause and effect, truth and falsehood, and
what is good or bad.

⚫ It is a collective endeavour by which people construct

meaning by exchanging, modifying, and improving on
their ideas or opinions.

⚫ When someone makes a claim, we ask for their reasons.

⚫ Reasoning by using arguments, is linking one idea to a

related idea. A strong link is reasonable, a weak link is
unreasonable. A complete link is logical, no link is
illogical.
Reasoning
Reason is something that we use whenever we
make a decision, and most of the time, our
reasoning occurs instinctively, as we decide on
the best path to take almost unconsciously,
depending on previous experiences involving
similar situations.

It is possible to train ourselves to reason

consciously, though, and the more one thinks about
the decisions one is making, the more one is able to
have active control over them.
Induction & Deduction - reason using an argument
What is an argument?
⚫Reason(s) given in support of an idea, action or theory - drawing of
inferences or conclusions from known or assumed facts.

⚫So all arguments have PREMISES (information as evidence or

claim(s)) and a CONCLUSION, where premises are used to arrive/infer
further information, evidence or claims beyond the information given.
⚫An argument must have:
⚫PREMISE(s)
⚫CONCLUSION

⚫When we reason using an argument, we are able to use logic.

⚫Unreasonable –premise(s) and conclusion relate only poorly
⚫Reasonable - premise(s) and conclusion relate well
⚫Logical - only one possible answer
⚫Illogical – both premise and conclusion do not relate at all
Logic only has one answer (computing-logic gate is true or false)
A computer is logical – 1 or 0
⚫ An argument is logical if it has only one answer (form not content)

⚫ The FIELD OF LOGIC studies ways in which human beings reason

through ARGUMENT

⚫ Logic is done inside an argument while reason can also be done

outside an argument by such methods as skipping steps, working
backward, drawing diagrams, looking at examples, or seeing what
happens if you change the rules of the system
 Logical Reasonable Unreasonable Illogical

Ability to reason

from one idea to another

ARGUMENT
Uses logic to reduce error in
relating one idea to another

FORMAL LOGIC
As only one possible
INFORMAL LOGIC
conclusion - valid
Use logic to find pattern in observations
2 premises
to suggest plausible conclusions –
1 conclusion
never valid
DEDUCTION
1 premise (summarising sample)
http://www.think- 1 conclusion
logically.co.uk/lt_answers.htm INDUCTION
Methods of reasoning
Both are ways of Reasoning, both use Arguments so both
have Premises and Conclusions. Both Infer a Conclusion

 Induction Deduction
START: with ‘All’ having two
parameters.
 START: with
observation(s) SAMPLE Relates one observation to
 END: Concludes with ‘All’ All in one parameter.

END: Concludes the

observation has the
other parameter.
➔ Informal Logic Formal Logic
ALL refers to the group: sterotype, prejudice, wisdom, theory, law, ‘fact’
OBSERVATION: refers to each member of the group
⚫ Logical categorizations of different types of
reasoning - the traditional main division made
in philosophy is between deductive reasoning
and inductive reasoning.

⚫ Formal logic has been described as the science

of deduction. Structure or FORM matters.

⚫ Informal logic. The study of inductive reasoning

is generally carried out within the field known as
informal logic or critical thinking. CONTENT
matters – 3 criteria.
Comparative summary

•Deductive techniques of formal logic always lead

from the general to the particular and never vice
versa.

•Inductive approaches, are aimed in an opposite

direction, from the particular to the general, and
allow for generalization and augmentation of
existing knowledge.
Everyday usage of induction
Person A, B, C, F, I, … W and Z like Bob Marley’s music.
Inference: Everybody likes Bob Marley’s music.
In fact person D, E, X and Y may not like Bob Marley’s music.
AXIOM – truth not proven or provable but taken for granted

Everyday usage of deduction

Person A believes that every word written in the Bible is true.
Applying the statement that ‘Without faith it is impossible to please
Him’ or ‘He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him’ . So if I
have faith, I will please him. And: If I diligently seek Him, He will
reward me.
This type of reasoning is properly referred to as axiomatic-
deductive since it is based on an axiom, namely that every word
written in the Bible is literally true.
Just because you cannot prove an AXIOM in an experiment doesn’t make it wrong.
 Inductive and Deductive Arguments
 Induction
 Observations to generalization
 Doctor – symptoms to treatment

 Detective – clues to whodunnit

 Questionnaires to conclusions

 Observations to hypotheses

Deduction
 Logic gates in computing
 Prejudices, stereotypes, proverbs,
words of wisdom applied to an
individual
 Testing of hypotheses
Methods of both use reasoning – both reason from
premises to conclusions – both use arguments
reasoning
Go explore :

https://www.livescienc http://www.think-
e.com/21569- logically.co.uk/lt_ans
deduction-vs- wers.htm
induction.html

https://www.scribbr.co
m/methodology/ded
uctive-reasoning/
INDUCTION
Known to Unknown

Known – what you

observe

Unknown – what you

infer by what you have
observed
⚫ INDUCTION

 To argue by induction is to argue by PROBABILITY, not certainty.

 Argument cannot be valid because the argument is not logical (has

the possibility of more than one possible conclusion).

 LOGIC is used to INCREASE VALIDITY (the chance of getting the

correct conclusion). It does this by 1) increasing the amount of relevant
evidence (observations); 2) & 3). Observations carefully chosen
increase validity and decrease error, make argument more reliable.

– An inductive argument always involves an element of doubt - it is

possible to make a wrong inductive inference from correct information.
– Also PREJUDICES are inductive GENERAL BELIEFS where an
unreliable (unjustified) generalizations is formed from limited data.
 INDUCTION

In

Latin
induction=leading Truth
or bringing into

Each door (gap - -) is an observation. To arrive at the

generalization (‘ truth’) one has to enter many doors (take
many observations)
INDUCTION
 INDUCTION

What is this, can you tell?

What do I do next to see the pattern clearer?

 INDUCTION

Possible conclusion: Is it a triangle? Circle? Square? Something else?

How can I find out?

 INDUCTION

Is this enough data?

This could be triangle or rectangle so not enough

How much more data do I need?

 INDUCTION

Is this enough? Do I need more data/observations?

. I can now conclude IT IS A TRIANGLE as I have sufficient data.

I can take more data just to be sure the pattern was not by chance.
But I don’t have to take every single data possible to conclude.
 INDUCTION

I can now conclude IT IS A TRIANGLE. This conclusion was probably not

obtained by chance. Increasing number of observations increases probability
that the answer was not obtained by chance and therefore is correct (as valid
as can be) - RELIABLE.

https://youtu.be/WAdpPABoTzE
INDUCTION – we use it everyday

The box (generalization /

hypothesis / theory) is induced
from the specific observations
⚫ Use as many observations

needed to make the

generalization more probable
than chance.

⚫ More obvious patterns need less

observations than less obvious
patterns.
Think of each separate dot is an
observation ⚫ Homogenous populations need
less observations than
- specific heterogenous ones.
 Induction ALWAYS starts with
observations

PREMISE
We observe that all computers we have seen have a key
board

CONCLUSION
All computers have keyboards
Induction always starts with observations

PREMISE
All Julie mangos I eat have the same smell
(I have not eaten all the Julie mangos in the world,
just a few, BUT I can INDUCE that)

CONCLUSION
All Julie mangoes have the same smell
We arrive at a generalization by process of induction:

We observe fruits
falling from coconut
trees, everything
that goes up comes
down.
We also observe other trees: Jimbilin, duran, almond,
and reach a conclusion (generalisation).

We are induced to believe that any

object in the air that is not fixed will fall.
PROPERTIES, USE, VALIDITY AND
LIMITATIONS OF INDUCTION
PROPERTIES OF INDUCTION
Induction is the process of reasoning from the
particular/specific to the general, from the known to
unknown. The basis of induction is the assumption
that if something is true in a number of observed
instances, it is also true in similar, but unobserved,
instances.

An inductive statement or inference is a statement

about the properties of a group of objects or situations
on the basis of direct evidence from a sample of the
objects or situations.
INDUCTION
Induction is the process of reasoning from the
particular/specific to the general, from the known to
unknown. The basis of induction is the assumption
that if something is true for a number of observed
instances, it is also true in similar, but unobserved,
instances.

An inductive statement or inference is a statement

about the properties of a group of objects or situations
on the basis of direct evidence from a sample of the
objects or situations.
USE OF INDUCTION

• In science, we attempt to find generalizations that will

apply universally → these generalization are called
scientific laws or theories.

• These generalizations make our inferences objective

rather than subjective, and rational rather than
ideological, as they summarize many observations.

• As the number of observation increases, as data

collected from what we observe become more precise
due to improvements in our observational skill and our
equipment → this results in more and more theories and
laws of greater scope.
 VALIDITY
In SCIENCE, the inductive argument must
be considered valid: induction is considered
valid if the following conditions are fulfilled:

1. The number of observations leading to the

generalization must be sufficiently large.

2. The observations must be repeated under a wide

variety of conditions (and representative of the
population studied).

3. No observation should conflict

with the derived universal law.
 VALIDITY
In SCIENCE, the inductive argument must
be considered valid: induction is considered
valid if the following conditions are fulfilled:

1. The number of observations leading to the

generalization must be sufficiently large.

2. The observations must be repeated under a wide

variety of conditions (and representative of the
population studied).

3. No observation should conflict

with the derived universal law.
⚫ I boil 5 pots of water – and CONCLUDE water boils at
100oC. TRUTH – WATER BOILS AT 100oC.
1)I boil 100 pots – same conclusion.
2)I boil 10 pots at different elevations – and notice the
water boils at a lower temp the higher you go.
2) I add impurities to water eg coffee – and notice that
adding impurities increases the boiling temp.

⚫ NEW CONCLUSION is the existing THEORY: The boiling

point of pure water at sea level is 100°C.
⚫ Water boils at a lower temperature as you gain altitude
(e.g., on a mountain) and Water boils at a higher
temperature if you increase atmospheric pressure.
 Limitation of induction

Consider condition 1: There is no way of finding out how

many observations will be a large enough number.

Consider condition 2: it is difficult to determine what is a

sufficiently wide variety of circumstances and what is a
significant variation in the circumstances.

Consider condition 3: We may always find one condition

under which the law does not hold.

The laws inferred by induction cannot be firmly established,

confirmed or proven by induction ALONE.
DEDUCTION
 DEDUCTION

Deduction is a logically valid process.

To argue by deduction is to argue by CERTAINTY, not
probability.
A deductive argument is VALID (it is what it is) because
it is LOGICAL as it has one possible answer – true or
false.

A valid deductive argument can only be incorrect IF the

premises are incorrect (▲unsound). SO inappropriate
premises (prejudices) can lead to incorrect deductions).

So deduction can be certain, but induction cannot be.

prejudices
DEDUCTION hypothesis

All Jamaicans are loud

Paul is a Jamaican
Paul is loud Metals bend when heated
Copper is a metal
Copper when heated with bend
Unknown – what was
proverbs
inferred based on
A gentle answer turns away wrath observations or
I will give a gentle answer assumed correct
It will turn away wrath Unknown to Known
Known – one member
of the set above which
may or may not fit
 Deduction
deduction= leading
away, drawing out
‘Truth’
deduction

Once you know the ‘truth’, you only need to make one
observation (exit one door) to make a deduction.
The basis for which the ‘truth’ was established may be
induction or it may have been self evident.
NB. One arrives at a truth by induction (that anything up
comes down) and then made a deduction about coconuts
falling.
Methods of reasoning
both are ways of Reasoning – both have premises
and conclusions – both use arguments
 Induction Deduction
Premise(s)
Premise P1: Starts with ‘All’ (group of
 Starts with individual or observations with two attributes)
specific observation(s) P2: One observation with one
Conclusion attribute
 Ends with ‘All’ (group of Conclusion
observations) One observation with the other
attribute

Formal Logic
 Informal Logic
 Deduction starts with a generalization:

Generalization: We know Newton’s

law of gravity which
applies to all bodies
in the universe.
Newton's law of universal gravitation states that a particle attracts every other particle
in the universe using a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses
and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.

Specific: When applied to the

earth, it predicts that
the earth will attract
any body suspended
above it. Thus the
body will fall.
We deduce from
Newton’s law of
gravity that a coconut
not suspended by its
stem will fall to the
ground, although one
may never have
seen a fruit fall from
a tree.
Deduction starts with a generalization:

PREMISES
P1: All computers have a keyboard

P2: I just purchased a computer

CONCLUSION
It will have a keyboard
Deduction starts with a generalization:
PREMISES
P1: Everybody working at MITS has to sign a company
book at the front desk before they start working

P2: Tasha was seen signing in a company book at the

front desk of MITS

CONCLUSION
Conclusion: Tasha is a worker at MITS
PROPERTIES, USE, VALIDITY AND
LIMITATIONS OF DEDUCTION
⚫ Deduction is the form of reasoning by which a specific
conclusion is inferred from one or more premises.

⚫ In every day use, deduction is used to apply a general

premise to a specific situation.

⚫ Deduction is used in science to determine if a

hypothesis is correct or not.
 PROPERTY OF DEDUCTION

A deduction (that is, a deductive conclusion

or inference) is a statement about the
properties or behavior of a particular object
or situation that is derived, by simple rules
of logic from a statement covering the
whole class of objects or situation to which
the one under consideration belongs.
DEDUCTION
We deduce that since we have a box with
a top, it can be opened

APPLICATION
P1: Boxes with tops can be opened
P2: Our box has a top
C: It can be opened

ARGUMENT VALID/
ASSUME PREMISE TRUE/
BASED ON ARGUMENT, YOU OPEN
THE BOX

HYPOTHESIS
P1: Metals expand when heated
We have a box
P2: Copper is a metal
C: Copper will expand when heated
(Induced from specific observations)
ARGUMENT VALID/
USE AN OBSERVATION TO TEST THE
HYPOTHESIS,
TO SEE IF IT IS TRUE OR NOT
 Deductive arguments involve the claim that the
truth of its premises guarantees the truth of its
conclusion
 The terms valid and invalid are used to characterise
the FORM of the deductive arguments
 The valid deductive argument succeeds when, if
you accept the evidence as TRUE (the premises),
you must accept the conclusion to be TRUE

DO NOT CONFUSE TRUTH WITH VALIDITY

 VALIDITY OF DEDUCTION
Two conditions have to be fulfilled for the deduction to be
valid.
1. The premises (generalization and test observation) need
to be TRUE.

2. The FORM of the argument needs to be VALID (by being

logical) – leading to only one conclusion
(First premise is the universal set with two attributes, second
is the test observation with one attribute, and the conclusion
with the other attribute)

If 1 but not 2 – premises true + argument invalid = unsound conclusion

If 2 but not 1 – premises false + argument valid = unsound conclusion
If 1 and 2 – premises true + argument valid = sound conclusion
 FORM OF THE DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENT

Validity of the argument:

1. In valid deductive reasoning, the conclusion must be true if

the premises are true.

This requires the form of the argument to be logical. A valid

deductive argument is logical (has only one possible answer)

All P’s are Q’s A=B A=B

John is a P C=A B=C
So John is also a Q So C = B So A = C
 FORM OF THE DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENT
Deduction is the form of reasoning by which a specific
conclusion is inferred from one or more premises.

Independent Dependent
variable variable
Thus,

Premises: All human beings have one head (generalization)

Bertha is a human being, (applied to particular)

Conclusion: Bertha has one head.

 FORM OF THE DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENT
Deduction is the form of reasoning by which a specific
conclusion is inferred from one or more premises.

Thus,
A
Premises: All human beings have one head (generalization)

Bertha is a human being, (applied to particular)

Conclusion: Bertha has one head.

 FORM OF THE DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENT
Deduction is the form of reasoning by which a specific
conclusion is inferred from one or more premises.

Thus,
A B
Premises: All human beings have one head (generalization)

Bertha is a human being, (applied to particular)

Conclusion: Bertha has one head.

 FORM OF THE DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENT
Deduction is the form of reasoning by which a specific
conclusion is inferred from one or more premises.

Thus,
A B
Premises: All human beings have one head (generalization)
C
Bertha is a human being, (applied to particular)

Conclusion: Bertha has one head.

 FORM OF THE DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENT
Deduction is the form of reasoning by which a specific
conclusion is inferred from one or more premises.

Thus,
A B
Premises: All human beings have one head (generalization)
C A
Bertha is a human being, (applied to particular)

Conclusion: Bertha has one head.

 FORM OF THE DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENT
Deduction is the form of reasoning by which a specific
conclusion is inferred from one or more premises.

Thus,

So, if every A is B
Premises: All human beings have one head (generalization)
And C is A
Bertha is a human being, (applied to particular)

Conclusion: Bertha has one head.

 FORM OF THE DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENT
Deduction is the form of reasoning by which a specific
conclusion is inferred from one or more premises.
A=B
C=A
So C = A = B
Thus, So C = B

So, if every A is B
Premises: All human beings have one head (generalization)
And C is A
Bertha is a human being, (applied to particular)
Then C is also a B
Conclusion: Bertha has one head.

An argument is valid if its form is valid.

 LOGICALLY VALID DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENT
Premises: 1. Everyone who falls from the top of this
building suffers a severe injury
2. Jim has fallen from the top of the building
Conclusion: 3. Jim suffered a severe injury

This is the key feature of a logically valid deduction: if the

premises of a logically valid deduction are true, then the
conclusion must be true.

The law also makes it possible to make predictions like ‘If

Jim fall from the building he will suffer severe injury’.
Similarly in science we can make predictions from the
laws.
E.G., Newton’s law of gravity was used to predict that if a
coconut breaks from its stem, it will fall to the ground.
 LOGICALLY VALID DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENT

Example based on a law discovered by

Galileo

Premises:

All objects are attracted to the ground at the same speeds

A folder and a bit of paper are objects

Conclusion: A folder and a bit of paper will fall to the ground

at the same speeds and will therefore arrive at the same time.
 LOGICALLY VALID DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENT

Example based on a law discovered by

Galileo
Premises:
So, if A = B
All ‘objects’ are ‘attracted to the ground at the same speeds’
and C = A
A ‘folder and a bit of paper’ are ‘objects’

then C = B
Conclusion: A ‘folder and a bit of paper’ will ‘fall to the
ground at the same speeds’ and will therefore arrive at the
same time’.
LOGICALLY VALID DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENT
Another Example A = B, C=A Therefore C=B:

Premises:
1) All water from the tap boils at 100 ºC at
sea level
2) The water in my pot contains tap water at
sea level

Conclusion: If the temperature reaches

100ºC, the water in my pot will boil.
LOGICALLY VALID DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENT
Another example A=B, B=C Therefore A=C:

Premises:
1) If the brakes fail, the car will not stop.
2) If the car does not stop, there will be an
accident.

Conclusion: Therefore, If the brakes fail,

there will be an accident.
Circular argument Invalid argument
A=B
So B = A A = B or Z
C=A
It is dangerous to drive So C = B
on icy streets.
The streets are icy now Next slide
so it is dangerous to
drive. Invalid argument

All UWI students have a A=B

yellow UWI ID C=B
So all students with a So C = A
yellow UWI ID is a UWI
student
Example of invalid argument: If A = B or Z
C=A
1. Some persons with spots have measles So C = B
2. Eileen has spots https://slideplayer.com/slide/10765685/
3. Eileen has measles

All persons
with spots

Those with measles

Eileen ?

The form of the argument must be valid (eg logical) for the
conclusion to be acceptable
Example of invalid deductive argument

Can you spot the invalid argument?

All the beans in this bag are white
These beans are from this bag
These beans are white If A = B
C=B
All the beans in this bag are white So C = A
These beans are white
These beans are from this bag

The form of the argument must be valid (logical) for the

conclusion to be acceptable
 Limitations of Deduction

Truth?

Partial truth?
deduction
Untruth?

The ‘truth’ many not be true. Even if your reasoning or

deduction process is valid, your conclusion may not be
true IF your premise is NOT TRUE.
Example - true (but unacceptable) conclusion
because it is based on false premises:

Premises: All pigs have wings

Animals with wings can’t fly

Conclusion: Pigs can’t fly

The argument is valid but the premise is false.

Thus the premises have to be true and the form

of the argument valid for the conclusion to be
acceptable.
COMPARATIVE SUMMARY
 Comparison
INDUCTION DEDUCTION
Form of Informal logic - identifies Deduction
Formal logic - derives a
logic similarities/patterns within a particular from a set of
group of particulars. accepted facts.
Form Direct observation of nature. Identification of an
Then formation of a unknown particular, drawn
generalization derived from from its semblance to a set
examination of a set of of known facts.
particulars.
Known to Unknown. Unknown to Known.
Direction particular/specific to general. General to particular/
specific.
Validity of Not valid: Weak or strong. Validity Valid or Invalid
argument can be increased.
Summary INDUCE: to lead or draw into, DEDUCE: to lead from, to
to infer, to persuade draw from
SCIENTIFIC USES OF
INDUCTION AND
DEDUCTION
Scientific Use of Induction & Deduction
⚫ These two methods of reasoning have a very different "feel" to them
when you're applying scientific method.

⚫ Inductive reasoning, by its very nature, is more open-ended and

exploratory (SCIENTIFIC STUDY).

⚫ Deductive reasoning is more narrow in nature and is concerned with

testing or confirming hypotheses (EXPERIMENT).
⚫ Even though a study may look like it's purely deductive (e.g., an
experiment designed to test the hypothesized effects of some
treatment on some outcome), most research involves both inductive
and deductive reasoning processes at some time in the project.

⚫ We could assemble these two types of reasoning into a single

circular one that continually cycles from theories down to
observations and back up again to theories.
 Inductive reasoning moves from specific observations to broader generalizations
and theories. Informally, we sometimes call this a "bottom up" approach.
In inductive reasoning, we begin 1) with specific observations and measures, 2) begin
to detect patterns and regularities, 3) formulate some tentative hypotheses that we can
explore, and 4) finally end up developing some general conclusions or theories.

INDUCTION DEDUCTION

Use of null
hypothesis

Deductive reasoning works from the more general to the more specific.
Sometimes this is informally called a "top-down" approach.
We might begin 1) with thinking up a theory about our topic of interest.
2) We then narrow that down into more specific hypotheses that we can test.
3) We narrow down even further when we collect observations to test the hypotheses.
4) This ultimately leads us to be able to confirm (or not) our original theories.
 WHAT IS SCIENCE?

 Scientific Process/Method
– careful and unbiased observations, making inferences and
generalizations formulating hypotheses, laws and theories
(induction), testing generalizations: making predictions
(deduction) and further testing of predictions. Called the
scientific-hypothetico-deductive method
 Science is “a process of learning to know the nature of
everything in the material world….” Rothchild

The scientific - hypothetico-deductive method,

involves both induction and deduction (next lecture).
12/09/2017
HISTORY
Historic Balance between Sci. knowledge
Period inductive and deductive development
methods
Antiquity Strong prevalence of Visibly high
6 BC – 5 AD inductive methods
Dark Ages Radical dominance of Visibly slow
5 th – 16 th cc. scholastic-deductive
method
Renaissance Prevalence of inductive Visibly high
16-17 th cc. methods
18 th c Imbalance, dominance of Some slowdown
inductive methods
19 th c. Fair balance between Visibly high
deductive and inductive
First half Imbalance, dominance of Probably high
of 20 th c. deductive methods
Second half Severe imbalance, Dramatic slowdown
of 20 th c. dominance of deductive
 ANTIQUITY
1983 Italian
postage stamp
honoring
Archimedes
(287-212 B.C.)
Shows a
hydraulic screw
(pump) he
invented.

Archimedes allied Mathematics with observations

Aristotle’s science theories were the most well-known and accepted 384-322 BC
Scientific endeavours in this period were relatively few and not recorded so
even if they occurred, they could not be improved upon.
Historic Balance between inductive Sci. knowledge
period and deductive methods development
Antiquity Strong prevalence of Visibly high
6 BC – 5 AD inductive methods
Dark Ages Radical dominance of Visibly slow
5 th – 16 th cc. scholastic-deductive method
Renaissance Prevalence of inductive Visibly high
16-17 th cc. methods
18 th c Imbalance, dominance of Some slowdown
inductive methods
19 th c. Fair balance between Visibly high
deductive and inductive
First half Imbalance, dominance of Probably high
of 20 th c. deductive methods
Second half Severe imbalance, Dramatic slowdown
of 20 th c. dominance of deductive
DARK AGES
There is a paucity of information available on Europe’s ‘Dark Ages’. Europe was
divided and the Roman Empire falling apart from within and attacked from without.
Of unknown effect was a massive volcanic eruption (535 AD) in Southeast
Asia (Krakatoa), causing plague, famine, death from Mongolia to
Constantinople. Krakatoa erupted massively again in 1883. Procopius, as
quoted by Stothers and Rampino, says of 536 AD that ... ‘The sun became dim
for a whole year.’ www.salve.edu : Of particular note was the bubonic plague,
which appeared in Constantinople in 542. This extraordinary plague swept
around the world several times. The plague ended a period of scientific and
economic growth.

The Black Death, or the Black Plague, was one of the deadliest pandemics in
human history. The pandemic is thought to have begun in Central Asia or India
and spread to Europe during the 1340s.The total number of deaths worldwide is
estimated at 75 million people; approximately 25-50 million of which occurred in
Europe. The Black Death is estimated to have killed 30% to 60% of Europe's
population.
Bubonic plague is thought to have returned to Europe every generation with
varying virulence and mortalities until the 1700s. During this period, more than
100 plague epidemics swept across Europe. On its return in 1603, the plague
killed 38,000 Londoners.
DARK AGES
Arabia, during Europe’s Dark Ages, experienced a ‘Golden Age’.
Arab civilization had placed greater emphasis on experimentation than any
other previous culture. They contributed to development of the scientific
method with their empirical, experimental and quantitative approach to
scientific inquiry, but failed to achieve a Scientific Revolution.
The Mongols destroyed Arabic libraries, observatories, hospitals, and
universities, culminating in the destruction of Baghdad, the capital and
intellectual centre, in 1258, which marked the end to the Arabic Golden Age.
European scholars then translated these texts from Arabic to Latin.
The scientific and technological initiative of the Islamic world was inherited by
the Europeans and laid the foundations for Europe's Renaissance and
Scientific Revolution.

With the beginning of the Renaissance of the 12th Century, interest in natural
investigation was renewed. Science developed, scholars perceiving nature as a
coherent system of laws that could be explained in the light of reason. With this
view the medieval men of science went in search of explanations for the
phenomena of the universe and achieved important advances. These advances,
however, were suddenly interrupted by the Black Plague and are virtually
unknown to the lay public of today, mainly because most theories advanced in
medieval science are today obsolete.
DARK AGES
During the Dark Ages, the world system was based on
preconceived notions which had their foundation in religion and
philosophy. Not much observation, but axiomatic-deductive
and scholastic-deductive reasoning was employed.

Post mortem examination was regarded

as sinful. Shows a physician and a
monk (left) rebuking a surgeon who has
removed some organs from a cadaver

Possibly the major shift in medical thinking was the gradual rejection in the
1400s of what may be called the 'traditional authority' approach to
science and medicine. This was the notion that because some prominent
person in the past said something must be so, then that was the way it was,
and anything one observed to the contrary was an anomaly.
It was the time of PARADIGM shifts as
Universities were established in the 12th
observation destroyed
Century. Printing press was invented in 1450
long-held beliefs (induction)
Historic Balance between inductive Sci. knowledge
period and deductive methods development
Antiquity Strong prevalence of Visibly high
6 BC – 5 AD inductive methods
Dark Ages Radical dominance of Visibly slow
5 th – 16 th cc. scholastic-deductive method
Renaissance Prevalence of inductive Visibly high
16-17 th cc. methods
18 th c Imbalance, dominance of Some slowdown
inductive methods
19 th c. Fair balance between Visibly high
deductive and inductive
First half Imbalance, dominance of Probably high
of 20 th c. deductive methods
Second half Severe imbalance, Dramatic slowdown
of 20 th c. dominance of deductive
During Renaissance, inductive reasoning
based on observations stressed
“Francis Bacon emphasized the
importance of experiments and
laid great stress on their
systematic use to build up a
body of empirical knowledge
from which general theories
could be established and
tested” (Alan g. R. Smith,
Science and Society, Thames
and Hudson, London, 1972).
RENAISSANCE
“Galileo, the man who put all these
ideas into practice at one time or
another in the course of his life, was the
first ‘modern’ scientist, the first to
apply recognizably modern scientific
methods to the study of nature.” (Alan
G. R. Smith, ibidem.).

He invented the telescope and used

it to refute the preconceived notion
that the ‘heavenly bodies’ (e.g.
moon and Jupiter) were perfect
spheres.
Wiki – Science in the Middle Ages
RENAISSANCE

Combined
mathematics with
observations:
⚫ Theory of
Gravitation
⚫ Laws of motion

Sir Isaacs Newton

Historic Balance between inductive Sci. knowledge
period and deductive methods development
Antiquity Strong prevalence of Visibly high
6 BC – 5 AD inductive methods
Dark Ages Radical dominance of Visibly slow
5 th – 16 th cc. scholastic-deductive method
Renaissance Prevalence of inductive Visibly high
16-17 th cc. methods
18 th c Imbalance, dominance of Some slowdown
inductive methods
19 th c. Fair balance between Visibly high
deductive and inductive
First half Imbalance, dominance of Probably high
of 20 th c. deductive methods
Second half Severe imbalance, Dramatic slowdown
of 20 th c. dominance of deductive
18th CENTURY

Lavoisier, Antoine (1743-1794)

the father of modern Chemistry

Experimental
work stressed

Benjamin Franklin(1706–1790) – discovered electricity

The modern scientific method crystallized no later than in the 17th and 18th centuries.
A suitable environment was created in which it became possible to question scientific doctrine
Historic Balance between inductive Sci. knowledge
period and deductive methods development
Antiquity Strong prevalence of Visibly high
6 BC – 5 AD inductive methods
Dark Ages Radical dominance of Visibly slow
5 th – 16 th cc. scholastic-deductive method
Renaissance Prevalence of inductive Visibly high
16-17 th cc. methods
18 th c Imbalance, dominance of Some slowdown
inductive methods
19 th c. Fair balance between Visibly high
deductive and inductive
First half Imbalance, dominance of Probably high
of 20 th c. deductive methods
Second half Severe imbalance, Dramatic slowdown
of 20 th c. dominance of deductive
19th CENTURY
The Age of Exploration

1. Darwin’s five year voyage as a naturalist on the

H.M.S. Beagle (1831-1836): Observation of fossils,
of finches on Galapagos Islands

Many natural history studies were carried out Charles Darwin (1809 -1882)
The Origin of Species (1859)
19th CENTURY
Natural Selection
Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace first proposed the concept of natural
selection in 1858:
The young of any species intensely compete for survival due e.g., to food
shortage.
Those surviving to produce the next generation embody favorable natural
variations —the process of natural selection—and these variations are
passed on by heredity.
Therefore, each generation will improve adaptively over the preceding
generations, and this gradual and continuous process is the source of the
evolution of species.
The concept of natural selection has led to the modern day theory of
evolution.
The concept of natural selection was based on
many years of observations (inductive reasoning)
and less by deductive reasoning
19th CENTURY
Other scientific advances
1803: John Dalton publishes his Atomic Theory which states that all matter is composed
of atoms, which are small and indivisible.

1830: Proteins were discovered

1838, 1839, 1860: Schleiden and Schwann & Virchow independently formulate cell theory

1865: Pasteur’s germ theory & pasteurization, antiseptic surgery instituted

1865: Mendelian genetics published

1869: Johann Miescher found DNA in white blood cells

1879: Thomas Edison and Joseph Swan produce carbon-thread electric lamps

1881: Frederick Ives, 1st colored photograph

1896: Antoine Becquerel discovers radioactivity

Historic Balance between inductive Sci. knowledge
period and deductive methods development
Antiquity Strong prevalence of Visibly high
6 BC – 5 AD inductive methods
Dark Ages Radical dominance of Visibly slow
5 th – 16 th cc. scholastic-deductive method
Renaissance Prevalence of inductive Visibly high
16-17 th cc. methods
18 th c Imbalance, dominance of Some slowdown
inductive methods
19 th c. Fair balance between Visibly high
deductive and inductive
First half Imbalance, dominance of Probably high
of 20 th c. deductive methods
Second half Severe imbalance, Dramatic slowdown
of 20 th c. dominance of deductive
FIRST HALF OF 20th CENTURY
Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
Theoretical Physicist -
used deductive
reasoning
Named by Times
Magazine as Man of
the 20th Century:
Modern marvels are
based on his work in
relativity, photoelectric
effect, light and
quantum theory
FIRST HALF OF 20th CENTURY
Application of new theories – use of deductive reasoning

⚫IT-waves of computer upgrades

⚫Biotechnology
Microbial
Tissue Culture
Transgenic
⚫Green revolution
⚫Molecular Biology
⚫Astronomy
Historic Balance between inductive Sci. knowledge
period and deductive methods development
Antiquity Strong prevalence of Visibly high
6 BC – 5 AD inductive methods
Dark Ages Radical dominance of Visibly slow
5 th – 16 th cc. scholastic-deductive method
Renaissance Prevalence of inductive Visibly high
16-17 th cc. methods
18 th c Imbalance, dominance of Some slowdown
inductive methods
19 th c. Fair balance between Visibly high
deductive and inductive
First half Imbalance, dominance of Probably high
of 20 th c. deductive methods
Second half Severe imbalance, Dramatic slowdown
of 20 th c. dominance of deductive
SECOND HALF OF 20th CENTURY

Modern Physics
⚫ In cases where induction cannot be directly
applied because the object or concept is
unobservable, such as some elementary
particles, and only their effects or footprints can
be observed, hypothesis have to be made
⚫ and deductions from these hypothesis can be
tested by observations.
 Abdus Salam was
born in Jhang, a
small town in what is
now Pakistan, in
1926. His father was
an official in the
Department of
Education in a poor
farming district. His
family has a long
tradition of piety and
Abdus Salam, Nobel learning.
Laureate in Theoretical
Physics, 1978
SECOND HALF OF 20th CENTURY

Salam was a theoretical physicist, relied largely on

deductive reasoning. He worked on the interactions
between elementary particles, smaller than electrons.
We now know that the elementary building blocks of
matter are quarks, as they are called. But they have
never been isolated. We have to use deductive
reasoning to establish their existence.
The accumulation of many experimental results, which
match predictions based on quarks, convince us that
quarks are real.
Same happens with DNA – but this is a bit easier to see
The scientific method is not static. The
scientific method involves an interplay
between induction and deduction.

More on the scientific method – the

hypothetico-deductive approach in your
next lecture.
APPLICATION
APPLICATION:

Criticize the methodology (especially inductive

and deductive reasoning) used by Researchers
A, B and C described below in investigating the
following:

A fossil of an apparently ancient bird was

discovered in the dense forest of the Blue
Mountains in April 2005. Researchers were
invited by the Institute of Jamaica to view the
fossil, and if necessary carry out further
investigations, and to comment on the finding.
Methodology of Researcher A

Because the fossil appeared to be so old,

Researcher A came to the conclusion that it
was one of the first birds created by God and is
therefore 3566 years old, which is how long
ago the world was created by God, according
to scholars who have studied the chronology of
the Bible.
Methodology of Researcher B

According to Researcher B, the fossil looked

like that of a pre-historic bird which was
discovered in Cuba in 1940. Researchers in
Cuba estimated that the pre-historic bird must
have lived over 10,000 years ago. So
researcher B came to the conclusion that the
fossil is over 10,000 years old.
Methodology of Researcher C

Researcher C carries out several investigations:

He tries to find other fossils in the area.
He send all fossils found to 5 universities in North America
for carbon dating in order to determine the age of the
fossil.
He consults his compendium on fossils, to see which known
fossil the ones found correspond most closely to.
Based on his investigations, Researcher C found several
similar fossils in the Blue Mountain area. All fossils were
subjected to carbon dating and found to be about 1000
years old. The fossils found were similar in structure to a
fossil reported in his compendium which was dated to be
about 1000 years by several researchers. Researcher C
then comes to the conclusion that the birds existed in
Jamaica about 1000 years ago.
Deductive reasoning 1:

Researcher A made one observation, not inductive.

Research A used axiomatic-deductive method twice.
deductive reasoning 1:
Any creature that looks old was one of first created
by God
This bird looks old
Therefore this bird was one of first created by God
Deductive reasoning 2:
•Anything written in the Bible is literally true’
•From the chronologies written in the bible it can
be deduced that God created the world 3566
years ’.
•Therefore the world was created 3566 years
ago.

There is no way of testing the premise, but the

conclusion is contrary to current scientific
evidence for the age of the universe.
Researcher B is in a sense not much different
from Researcher A.
•He makes only one observation to come to his
conclusion that the fossil is of the same type of as
the birds found in Cuba.
•Deduction used
•All fossil looking like the one found by the
Cubans is 10,000 years old (This inductive
conclusion is based on only one observation)
•This fossil looks like that
•Therefore this fossil is 10,000 years old.
Shortcoming

He accepts the conclusion of the researchers in

Cuba that birds of this type lived over 10,000
years ago. Need to check the source
⚫ Was the Cuban research sound?
⚫ Was it verified by others?
 Researcher C used the accepted inductive procedure
in coming to his conclusions:

There should be as many observations as possible

(digging up other fossils, using several sources of
carbon dating)

The research should be carried out under as many

different situations as possible (again digging up
other fossils, using different sources of carbon
dating, and using other sources such as his
compendium, which was accepted by the scientific
community)

No observation went contrary to his conclusion the

birds lived about 1000 years ago in Jamaica.
NOTE: This is NOT an experiment
INDUCTION AND DEDUCTION
Objectives: After completing this section you should be able to
a) Give similarities and differences between Induction & Deduction

b) Induction:
– Define
– Give examples how used everyday and in science
– Understand when strong or weak, reliable or unreliable
– Describe how validity can be increased
– Limitations in using inductive reasoning in science

c) Deduction
– Define
– Give examples how used everyday and in science
– Understand when valid or invalid, sound or unsound
– Describe limitations in using deductive reasoning in science

d) Compare contribution of induction and deduction to scientific

progress through history.
Summary
⚫ Reason & Reasoning
⚫ Induction
⚫ Deduction
⚫ Properties, validity and limitations of Induction
⚫ Properties, validity and limitations of deduction
⚫ Comparative summary
⚫ History
⚫ Application
⚫ ANY QUESTIONS?