The CyberPhilosopher

When looking at an argument, one of the first things you want to do is determine if an argument is Deductive or Inductive. Most of the arguments we make from day to day are actually inductive arguments, but they tent to have a fair amount of deductive sub-arguments in them as well as wording to try to make it appear as tho the argument is itself Deductive.Why? Because one of the differences between an Inductive argument and a Deductive one is that if the argument is deductive and all the premises are true, then it is is impossible that the conclusion is false. The flip side to this is that if an argument is inductive and all the premises are true, it is simply highly likely that the conclusion is true (or improbable that the conclusion is false).

There are other commonly discussed definitions of Deductive or Inductive (for example, is the argument moving from particular to general or general to particular?). These definitions tend to be problematic as examples can be given that would appear to defy the conventions.

An example of a Deductive argument:

If my car has gas and is not broken, it will be able to run.

My car has gas and is not broken.

Therefore, it will be able to run.

The first two statements are premises, the final statement is the conclusion. Note that the conclusion is essentially defined in the premises. Because of this, deductive arguments are often arguments of rules such as those in Mathematics or arguments from Definitions. The truth is in the known facts, it is just being brought to the surface.

An example of a Deductive argument that is from Definition would be:

Bob is a bachelor.

Therefore Bob is not married.

The conclusion follows from the premise because the fact that a bachelor is defined as being an unmarried man.

An example of a Inductive argument would be:

I have seen many birds.

All birds I have seen can fly.

Therefore, all birds can fly.

This conclusion is actually false, as we know that that there are birds that can not fly. However the premises are all true. It would be the case that this statement was probable if we did not know of any birds that could not fly. It would be definitively true if birds were defined as being able to fly (however it be a deductive argument at this point).