This site is currently being transferred to a new system,
and will be relaunched at the beginning of 2009.
Induction
From Chains of Reason
Induction is a form of reasoning in which the conclusion follows from the premises not with certainty - as with deductive conclusions - but merely with probability. That is, an inductive conclusion could still be false even if all of the premises are true.
For example:
- Premise 1
- The Sun has always risen again within a few hours of setting in the past.
- Premise 2
- The Sun is setting.
- Conclusion
- The Sun will rise again within a few hours.
The above conclusion, unlike a deductive conclusion, does not merely state explicitly what is implicit in the premises, because the premises, unlike the conclusion, make no claim about the future. In other words, the conclusion needn't be true even if both of the premises are true. For example, the premises do not, by themselves, rule out the possibility of the Sun vanishing forever from its location in space shortly after setting on this occasion. Although inductive arguments are not as rigorous as deductive arguments, we rely on them everyday, as the above example shows,.
See also
External links
- Inductive reasoning - Wikipedia article
