Inductive reasoning is by far the most common type of argument that we usually encounter in our daily lives. Likewise, inductive reasoning is an essential tool to experience a world in which we make decisions based on predictions, but without absolute certainty, since they cannot logically guarantee the truth of a conclusion.
For this reason, in this Psychology-Online article we will see What is inductive reasoning, its characteristics, different types and some examples.
What is inductive reasoning
The inductive method, also called the Aristotelian method, is a process that seeks to establish a universal law from particular cases. Similarly, the term induction, from the Latin inductio and in ancient Greek translated with the expression epagoghé, it literally means “to carry within”, “to call to oneself” or “to bring out oneself”.
In contrast to the inductive method we find the deductive method, which proceeds from the universal to the particular, instead of from the particular to the universal and, in general, exposes us to fewer errors.
Characteristics of inductive reasoning
Therefore, inductive reasoning consists of a generalization based on experience data or observations that act as clues. However, this procedure does not guarantee that the choice is correct, but in general it helps to solve the problem by saving cognitive work and enriching the knowledge base.
In this way, inductive reasoning is used to:
- The formation of concepts.
- The creation of hypotheses.
- Identification of the causal relationship.
- Predictions and generalizations.
- In most of the processes.
Likewise, the concept of similarity has great importance in the inductive reasoning process, since it allows us to generalize and draw conclusions based on the similarity between classes, events, animals or things.
Fundamentals of inductive reasoning
Inductive reasoning is made up of two fundamental aspects:
- Data analysis: identify useful trends or schemes to formulate hypotheses on which to guide our future actions. It is therefore clear that the ability to interpret data is essential and that the more mental models we have at our disposal, the more we can understand what is really happening.
- Continuous verification of hypotheses: that is, verify the starting hypotheses based on the learning derived from the new information. In complex systems, and unlike what happens in deductive reasoning, we are never certain that the hypotheses are correct, no matter how well constructed they are. Therefore, it will be necessary to continually test them and modify them based on new evidence.
Types of inductive reasoning
We can evaluate inductive reasoning from an effective or stronger spectrum to ineffective or weaker. The most effective reasoning is that in which the premises lead to a conclusion that is probably true, with a high degree of probability.
Enumerative inductive reasoning
One of the first philosophers to resort to this concept was Aristotle, who credited Socrates with having discovered it. Aristotle maintained that induction was, precisely, “the procedure that leads from the details to the universal.” Therefore, inductive arguments by enumeration are a type of argument that aims to reach a general conclusion from a finite number of cases.
However, due to its inability to obtain scientifically binding statements from concrete individual cases, the inductive process was denied all validity by metaphysical logic.
Inductive reasoning by elimination
The first philosopher to depart from Aristotelian auctoritas, still considered valid in the 17th century, was Francis Bacon. Francis argued that induction should be not by enumeration, like Aristotle, but by elimination. In this way, Bacon opened the doors to a reconsideration of induction, establishing a close relationship with scientific research, observation and experimentation.
After Bacon, however, the conception of induction as a passage from the particular to the universal was progressively replaced by a different conception, which defined induction as the “expansive but only probable inference” and deduction as a “non-extensive inference.” but necessary.”
Structure of inductive reasoning
In the inductive method, the starting point is a practical application of the aspect in question or real problem and the interpretation of some data to reach general conclusions and, finally, the real theory, thanks to the process of abstraction and generalization.
The typical form of inductive reasoning is as follows: “since objects of a class identified through property P also enjoy property Q, any other object that enjoys P will also enjoy Q.”
Examples of inductive reasoning
To simplify the matter, it is necessary to give some examples of inductive reasoning:
- I took a blue ball out of the bag;
- I took another blue ball out of the bag;
- Therefore, it is reasonable to think that all the balls in the bag are blue.
O well:
- I saw a black crow fall;
- I saw another black crow;
- Therefore, I can say that probably all crows are black.
As we can see, in the last statement two expressions are used (“it is reasonable to think” and “probably”) that make the result not definitive. This is because the inductive method is the basis of the experimental method in which just collecting data and repeating the experiment over time They allow us to validate the result obtained in a general sense.
This article is merely informative, at Psychology-Online we do not have the power to make a diagnosis or recommend a treatment. We invite you to go to a psychologist to treat your particular case.
If you want to read more articles similar to Inductive reasoning: what it is, characteristics, types and exampleswe recommend that you enter our category.
Bibliography
- Arcangeli, E. (2014). Inductive ragionamento definition and meaning. Retrieved from: https://www.igorvitale.org/ragionamento-induttivo-definizione/