Inductive reasoning: what it is, characteristics, types and examples

Inductive reasoning is by far the most common type of argument that we usually come across in our daily lives. Similarly, inductive reasoning is an essential tool for experiencing a world in which we take 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.

Index

1. What is inductive reasoning
2. Characteristics of inductive reasoning
3. Types of inductive reasoning
4. Structure of an 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 induction and in ancient Greek translated with the expression epagoghé, it literally means "to carry inside", "to call oneself" or "to take oneself out".

In contrast to the inductive method we find the deductive method, which proceeds from the universal to the particular, instead of the particular to the universal and, in general, we are exposed to less mistakes.

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.

Thus, inductive reasoning is used to:

• Concept formation.
• The creation of hypotheses.
• Identification of the causal relationship.
• predictions and generalizations.
• In most of the processes decision making.

Likewise, the concept of similarity is of great importance in the process of inductive reasoning, since that allows us to generalize and draw conclusions based on the similarity between classes, events, animals or things.

Fundamentals of inductive reasoning

Inductive reasoning consists of two fundamental aspects:

1. Data analysis: identify useful trends or schemes to formulate hypotheses on which to guide our future actions. Therefore, it is evident that the ability to interpret the data is essential and that the more mental models we have at our disposal, the more we can understand what is really happening.
2. Continuous verification of hypotheses: that is, to verify the starting hypotheses on the basis of the learning derived from the new information. In complex systems, and contrary to 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 test them continuously and modify them based on new evidence.

We can evaluate inductive reasoning from a spectrum that is effective or stronger to ineffective or weaker. The most effective reasoning is one 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 discovering it. Aristotle maintained that induction was precisely "the procedure that leads from the details to the universal." Thus, inductive arguments by enumeration are a type of argument that are intended to draw a general conclusion from a finite number of cases.

However, due to its inability to obtain scientifically binding statements from of concrete individual cases, the inductive process was denied all validity by logical metaphysics.

Inductive reasoning by elimination

The first philosopher to depart from the Aristotelian auctoritas, still considered valid in the 17th century, was Francis Bacon. Francis argued that induction should be not by enumeration, like the Aristotelian, but by elimination. In this way, Bacon opened the doors to a induction reconsideration, 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 "expansive inference but only probable" and deduction as "inference not extensive but necessary".

The inductive method starts with a practical application of the aspect in question or real problem and the interpretation of some data to reach general conclusions and, finally, to 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 of the property P also enjoy the 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 raven 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 data collection and repeating the experiment over time allow validation in a general sense of the result obtained.

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 examples, we recommend that you enter our category of Social psychology.

• Arcangeli, E. (2014). Inductive reasoning definition and meaning. Recovered from: https://www.igorvitale.org/ragionamento-induttivo-definizione/