Peggy,
I think, as your whole presentation implies, which you are doing depends on whether you are using theory to create expectations of fact, or using facts to build a theory. You probably are doing both. Does this help? This is the way I think about it, for good or ill. In every syllogism, there are three terms: An assignment of a property to an class: All swans are white An assignment of an individual to a class: This bird is a swan An assignment of a property to an individual: this bird is white. A deductive inference is one in which the conclusion is the assignment of a property to an individual. An inductive inference is one in which the conclusion is the assignment of a property to a class. An abductive inference is one in which the conclusion is the assignment of an individual to a class. That latter two are both probable inferences, as you lay out. We have to repeat them to approach certainty in our conclusion. When making inductive inferences, we repeat our examination of members of the class to see if they share the property we attribute to the class. An induction is invalidated if we find a single member of the class who does not share the properties we attribute to the class. When making abductive inferences, we repeat our examination of the properties of the individual to see that thy all are properties that we attribute to the class. An abduction is invalidated if we find a single property of the individual that is not shared by all members of the class. It 's confusing because no science can go forward without using all forms of logic. Nick From: friam-boun...@redfish.com [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of peggy miller Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 6:08 PM To: friam@redfish.com Subject: [FRIAM] re vol. 105, issue 46 Enjoying your discussion of various elements of inductive reasoning vs. deductive reasoning, and it caused me to wonder the following related to how you might categorize the following type research: If something has been studied for a couple thousand years (in my case use of particular herbal formulas for medical purposes, and their impacts on health) and conclusions were drawn as to what worked, where it worked and when it worked, health wise, and now I am applying that gathered knowledge in my own observational case studies here in U.S. for both clinical purposes of aiding unhealthy with herbs and to expand scientific information on health impacts of various Chinese/Ayurvedic formulas, would my work be considered inductive? or deductive? or both? I read the following definition of inductive and deductive and it got me wondering where my work fit. Guide To Inductive & Deductive Reasoning Induction vs. Deduction October, 2008, by The Critical Thinking Co.T Staff <http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=20> Description: Image removed by sender. Bookmark and Share Induction and deduction are pervasive elements in critical thinking. They are also somewhat misunderstood terms. Arguments based on experience or observation are best expressed inductively, while arguments based on laws or rules are best expressed deductively. Most arguments are mainly inductive. In fact, inductive reasoning usually comes much more naturally to us than deductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning moves from specific details and observations (typically of nature) to the more general underlying principles or process that explains them (e.g., Newton's Law of Gravity). It is open-ended and exploratory, especially at the beginning. The premises of an inductive argument are believed to support the conclusion, but do not ensure it. Thus, the conclusion of an induction is regarded as a hypothesis. In the Inductive method, also called the scientific method, observation of nature is the authority. In contrast, deductive reasoning typically moves from general truths to specific conclusions. It opens with an expansive explanation (statements known or believed to be true) and continues with predictions for specific observations supporting it. Deductive reasoning is narrow in nature and is concerned with testing or confirming a hypothesis. It is dependent on its premises. For example, a false premise can lead to a false result, and inconclusive premises will also yield an inconclusive conclusion. Deductive reasoning leads to a confirmation (or not) of our original theories. It guarantees the correctness of a conclusion. Logic is the authority in the deductive method. -- Miss Peggy Miller, owner/OEO Highland Winds wix.com/peggymiller/highlandwinds Art Studio/HerbShop is at 1520 S. 7th St. W. (Just off Russell, four blocks from Good Food Store) 406-541-7577 (home/office/studio shop) Shop Hours: Wed: 11-6 Thurs: 3-8 pm Fri-Sat: 11 am -6pm Herbal Consults during studio shop hours and also on Tuesdays.
<<image002.jpg>>
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
