Deductive and Inductive Reasoning

GROUP MEMBERS ROLE REG.
NO SIGNATURE
NGIGI MUTAHI GROUP LEADER L95S/15627/2023

NDUTA MBUGUA ASSISTANT GROUP LEADER L95S/15728/2023
MONG’INA MOGAKA SECRETARY L95S/15137/2023
HERA AJULU MEMBER L95S/16024/2023
ANDREW NDERITU MEMBER L95S/15441/2023
SHALOM ROGERS MEMBER L95S/15331/2023
STACEY WAMUCII MEMBER L95S/15801/2023
FLORENCE WANGUI MEMBER L95S/11750/2022
HOW DEDUCTIVE AND INDUCTIVE REASONING ARE
EMPLOYED IN LAW
INDUCTIVE REASONING
It is a logical process in which multiple promises all believed or found true most of the time are
combined to obtain a specific conclusion.
Steps of inductive thinking
STEPS EXAMPLE
STEP 1 Specific observation Cheap medications A and B both
cause major side effects
STEP 2 Pattern recognition All observed cheap medications
cause major side effects
STEP 3 General conclusion All cheap medications cause
major side effects
Inductive reasoning is a logical approach to making logical conclusions as illustrated in the table above.
INDUCTIVE REASONING IN RESEARCH
STEPS
1. Make an observation or gather data

2. Take a broad view of your data and search for patterns
3. Make general conclusions that you might incorporate into theories
TYPES OF INDUCTIVE REASONING

a) Inductive generalization
Use observation about a sample to come to a conclusion about the population it came
from.
b) Statistical generalization
It uses specific numbers to make statements about population while non-statistical
generalizations are not as specific.
c) Causal reasoning
Means making cause and effect links between different things. A casual reasoning
statement can often follow a standard set up
i. You start with a premise about a correlation(two events that occur)

ii. You put forward the specific direction of causality or refute any other direction.
iii. You conclude with a casual statement about relationship between two things.
d)Sign reasoning
It involves making correlation connections between two different things.
e) Analogical reasoning/Comparison reasoning
Drawing conclusions about something based on its similarities to another thing.
HOW INDUCTIVE REASONING IS EMPLOYED IN LAW
1. Lawyers almost always use inductive arguments and provide evidence that
seems irrefutable to support those arguments.
2. Their reasoning is aimed at establishing a logical relationship between known
facts
3. They are able to draw a strong conclusion and support it with available
evidence.
4. Inductive reasoning is often associated with extrapolating general rules from
different cases where specific facts vary.
5. It is useful when you want to develop a general theory based upon a limited set
of observations because you don’t have the means to investigate or measure
everything.
6. The process of inductive reasoning by analogy involves identifying relevant
similarities between the two cases and using them to draw conclusion about the
current cases.
7. For example, if a court has ruled in a case involving similar facts, that ruling may
be used as a basis for deciding similar cases.
DEDUCTIVE REASONING
This is the drawing of conclusions based on promises generally assumed to be true. If something is
assumed to be to be accurate and another relates to the first assumption, the original truth must also
hold true value for the second.
E.g.; If a car’s trunk is large and a bike does not fit into it, you may assume that the bike is also large
CHARACTERISTICS OF DEDUCTIVE REASONING
1Top to bottom reasoning
2. Effective for reaching certain conclusion
3. Not a foolproof method
DEDUCTIVE REASONING PROCESS
1. INITIAL ASSUMPTION-begins with an assumption
The assumption is usually a generalized statement that if something is true it must be true in
all cases.
2. SECOND PREMISE-made about first assumption
Must also be true if first statement is true
3. TESTING-is tested in a variety of assumption.
4. CONCLUSION-information is determined to be valid or invalid based on the test result.
TYPES OF DEDUCTIVE REASONING
1. SYLLOGISM
This is a form of reasoning in which a conclusion is drawn from two given /assumed propositions
(premises)
A common middle term is present in the 2 premises but not in the conclusion which may be invalid
For example; All dogs are animals, all animals have 4 legs; All dogs have 4 legs
Every syllogism has 3 parts; a major premise, a minor premise and conclusion.
Major premise is simply a rule of general applicability or put differently, a rule that applies not just to a
single person/situation, but rather to a category of people /situations.
The minor premise is a set of specific facts/situations.

The conclusion is a statement that the minor premise meets the requirements of the major premises
Syllogism is straightforward; if crafted properly, it should be able to prove the conclusion beyond dispute.
All that is necessary is that the major premise is true, the minor premise is true and it is accurate that the
major premise applies to the major premise.
Use by attorneys
First, lawyers must identify a major. Lawyers often refer to simply as the rule. The rule is derived from
one or many sources of legal authority. For example, a statute, a regulation, a case or all 3 should be
defined -the rule
Second, lawyers articulate or identify a specific set of facts.
Finally, as a result, the lawyers conclude that the facts must apply to the rule and therefore the syllogism
is accurate.
2.MODUS PONENS
A deduction presented as a conditional statement, proven by subsequent clauses: the antecedent and
consequent
It is bright and sunny today
Therefore, I will wear my sunglasses
3. MODUS TOLLENS
Opposite of a modus ponens.

Whereas modus ponens affirms it, modus tollens denies it.
I will not wear my sunglasses
Therefore, it is not bright and sunny today.
WHEN TO USE DEDUCTIVE REASONING

1. Problem solving
Many roles require you to use problem-solving skills to overcome challenges and discover
reliable solutions. You can apply the deductive reasoning process to your problem-solving efforts
by first identifying on accurate assumptions you can use a foundation for your solution.
Deductive reasoning often leads to fewer errors because it reduces guesswork.
2. TEAMWORK
Many organizations expect employees to work together to achieve results work together to
achieve results work together to achieve results. Teams often have employers with varying work
styles, which can hinder collaboration and reduce productivity. Using the process of deductive
reasoning, you can identify where the problem lies, draw accurate conclusion, and help team
members
In summary, deductive reasoning is about drawing specific conclusions from general
principles while reductive reasoning is about simplifying complex issues by analyzing the
constituent parts. Deductive reasoning is associated with certainty while reductive
reasoning focuses on comprehension and insight.
1. G
2. or the second.
3.
ASPECT DEDUCTIVE INDUCTIVE

REASONING REASONING
NATURE General to specific Specific to general
LOGIC Conclusive and certain Probabilistic and likely
VALIDITY If premises are true, the Likelihood of conclusion
conclusion is true being true
EXAMPLES Syllogism, formal logic Analogies, generalization
from evidence
USE Common in mathematics and Applied in scientific and legal
formal sciences reasoning
PRECISION High precisions, less room for Greater flexibility, may
error involve uncertainty
RISK Minimal risk of error if Risk of error due to
premises are true uncertainty in data.

Deductive and Inductive Reasoning

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Deductive and Inductive Reasoning

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Deductive and Inductive Reasoning

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GROUP MEMBERS ROLE REG.

NGIGI MUTAHI GROUP LEADER L95S/15627/2023

Steps of inductive thinking

INDUCTIVE REASONING IN RESEARCH

1. Make an observation or gather data

TYPES OF INDUCTIVE REASONING

i. You start with a premise about a correlation(two events that occur)

It involves making correlation connections between two different things.

e) Analogical reasoning/Comparison reasoning

Drawing conclusions about something based on its similarities to another thing.

HOW INDUCTIVE REASONING IS EMPLOYED IN LAW

CHARACTERISTICS OF DEDUCTIVE REASONING

1Top to bottom reasoning

2. Effective for reaching certain conclusion

3. Not a foolproof method

DEDUCTIVE REASONING PROCESS

1. INITIAL ASSUMPTION-begins with an assumption

2. SECOND PREMISE-made about first assumption

Must also be true if first statement is true

3. TESTING-is tested in a variety of assumption.

4. CONCLUSION-information is determined to be valid or invalid based on the test result.

TYPES OF DEDUCTIVE REASONING

The minor premise is a set of specific facts/situations.

Second, lawyers articulate or identify a specific set of facts.

It is bright and sunny today

Therefore, I will wear my sunglasses

Opposite of a modus ponens.

WHEN TO USE DEDUCTIVE REASONING

ASPECT DEDUCTIVE INDUCTIVE

You might also like