Logic, Inductive

Logical arguments are generally categorized as either inductive or deductive. Induction can be defined as a process for moving from particular instances to general statements or conclusions. It starts with a number of singular statements based on specific instances of an event. Based on these statements, a general conclusion is made. It is a method that helps us move from particular facts or observations to general statements that comprehend them. It is, therefore, used to generate theory from data. It is often seen as the opposite of deduction. This entry describes the nature of inductive logic and provides a historical account of its origins in ancient Greece and its subsequent development. Next, the major critiques of the inductive method are presented, followed by responses from its supporters, and the entry concludes with a review of the ways in which induction has been used in the domain of the social sciences.

One important aspect of inductive logic is that observations of the natural world need to be performed objectively and systematically. Observations that are made through our senses should not be guided by preconceived ideas or assumptions. [Page 478]Generalizations are made based on these observations, and such generalizations can be strengthened by further observations. Therefore, a theory to explain a phenomenon is formulated on the basis of generalization made using specific observations. One common example used to explain induction is the observation of ravens. If every raven that has been observed so far is black, we will be led to draw a conclusion that all ravens are black.

Scholars and philosophers have described in various ways the principles or steps in induction. Carl Hempel and Anthony O’Hear have identified four main stages in induction. The first step involves the observation and recording of facts. This is followed by careful analysis of these facts without being guided by any hypothesis or preconceived ideas. Generalizations are then made on the basis of the analysis of the observations, and finally, these generalizations are tested further.

Rom Harré has explained that the three principles of induction are accumulation, induction, and instance confirmation. The principle of accumulation refers to the view that knowledge grows through accumulation of attested facts, which does not alter previously known facts. The principle of induction emphasizes that inference of universal laws can be done on the basis of accumulated facts. Statements from observations and experiments can be used to infer a general law. The third principle explains that our belief in a law depends on the number of positive instances that have been observed. For example, the more black ravens we observe, the more willing we will be to accept the finding that all ravens are black.

Induction, particularly Baconian induction—a method developed by Francis Bacon (1561–1626), one of the founders of modern science—represents a popular conception of science and what scientists do; namely, rigorously making observations and conducting experiments. Through meticulous analysis of the data that have been collected, they produce new discoveries. Baconian induction starts with the process of making observations that are free from three idols, so called. The first of these, idols of the tribe, refers to the inclination to see more regularities in nature than there actually are. The second, idols of the cave, refers to personal weaknesses based on our likes and dislikes. The third, idols of the marketplace, refers to the confusions that arise from our language and terminologies.

...