Induction in philosophy: deduction, what is it

History of the term

The term “induction” was first mentioned in the works of Socrates. But he put a different meaning into it. Socrates called induction knowledge, which consisted in the search for a general definition to describe several particular cases. Aristotle describes induction as a comparative inference in which the mental process evaluates particular cases and reduces them to a common denominator. The thinker opposed induction to syllogism aimed at finding an average value.

During the Renaissance, Aristotle's legacy was reevaluated and criticized. In scientific circles, syllogism as a research method is denied, and the inductive method is considered the only way to obtain reliable information. F. Bacon is considered the creator of the modern inductive method. He refuses to use syllogism, but at the same time his theory of induction does not contradict syllogism at all. Bacon's inductive method is based on the principle of comparison. To come to a conclusion, it is necessary to analyze all cases and derive a pattern, that is, make a generalization.

The next attempt to abandon the syllogism in favor of induction was the study of J. Mill. He believed that in order to obtain a syllogical conclusion it is necessary to go from particular to particular, without striving for the general. He sees an inductive conclusion as an analysis of phenomena of the same order. All inferences require the use of four methods:

Consent method. If the phenomena being studied have at least one common feature, it is likely to be the root cause.
Method of difference. If two cases being compared have only one difference, but are otherwise similar, then this difference is the cause of the phenomenon.
Residue method. For that part of the phenomenon that cannot be explained by an obvious cause, it is necessary to look for justification among the remaining versions. At first glance they often seem incredible, but one will eventually prove to be a credible explanation.
Method of corresponding changes. If several phenomena change under the influence of one circumstance, there is probably a causal relationship between them.

It is noteworthy that the methods that Bacon presents as inductive have a deductive component. In particular, the residual method works on the principle of eliminating versions, moving from the general to the specific.

Modern epistemology

The ability to reason logically and base one's knowledge on facts rather than assumptions was valued not only in the past. It will always be useful in our world. Modern thinkers believe that in philosophy, induction is an argument based on the degree of probability. Its methods are applied depending on how suitable they are for solving the problem at hand.

In practical life it looks like this. If you want to go to a hotel, you start looking at reviews about it and see that the hotel has a high rating. This is an inductive argument. But for the final decision, you need to understand whether you have enough budget for such a vacation, whether you personally will like living there and how objective the assessments were. That is, you will need additional information.

Deduction is used in cases where the so-called validity criterion can be applied. For example, your vacation is possible only in September. A highly rated hotel closes in August, but another hotel stays open until October. The answer is obvious - you can only go on vacation to places where you can do it in the fall. This is how deduction is used not only in philosophy, but also in everyday life.

Features of the inductive method

In science, there are two types of inductive method: complete induction and incomplete induction.

Full induction

With complete induction, all objects from the group are subjected to mental analysis in turn. They are identified with a given feature. If each object meets the stated condition, we can confidently assume that the objects have a common nature.

Incomplete induction

The main difference between incomplete induction is the inability to make a reliable inference. With incomplete induction, individual elements of objects are compared, and based on the result, an assumption is made. Incomplete induction allows us to draw only a particular conclusion, while complete induction tends to the general.

Specifics

The weakness of induction is that it requires more time to consider new material. This learning model is less conducive to improving abstract thinking because it is based on concrete facts, experience, and other data. The inductive method should not become universal in teaching. According to modern trends, which involve an increase in the volume of theoretical information in educational programs and the introduction of appropriate study models, the importance of other logistical forms of presenting material is increasing. First of all, the role of deduction, analogy, hypothesis and others increases. The considered model is effective when the information is predominantly factual in nature or is associated with the formation of concepts, the essence of which can become clear only with such reasoning.

How to use deductive and inductive approaches correctly

Using induction as the only method of searching for information does not provide an objective picture.

Inductive and deductive methods of reasoning have opposite ways of moving thought, but they do not contradict each other, but complement. Deductive reasoning requires a general statement, while inductive reasoning collects particular cases, bringing them under one theory. To get a result close to the truth, you must use both methods at once. This allows you to test each theory and weed out implausible ones. And from the remaining ones, by comparison, select one that will meet all the specified requirements.

It is assumed that Descartes himself and others in the scientific community who used the method of induction were actually using a combination of methods. Using one method increases the risk of formulating false conclusions. If the researcher cannot bring all subjects under a common factor, he will be tempted to discard inconsistencies and thereby distort the conditions of the experiment and get the wrong result.

The role of thinking methods in psychology

Deduction and induction are methods of thinking that need to be used in combination. The study of mental processes responsible for the development, interconnection and interaction of thought processes is one of the tasks of psychology. The form of manifestation of deduction and induction in psychology is called deductive thinking.

People who seek therapy use incomplete induction and arrive at erroneous conclusions. For example, a wife who cheated on her husband has red hair, which means all women with red hair are cheaters. Sometimes, the conclusions obtained as a result of deductive thinking are so divorced from reality that they pose a threat to the patient’s life. If a person decides that water is dangerous for him, he will completely refuse to use it. Without treatment he will die. Water is a source of stress for him, causing a panic reaction. A person cannot cope with such a burden on the psyche on his own, and at the moment of an emotional outburst he becomes dangerous to others.

This unconscious use of inductive reasoning is called fixation. The way to get rid of fixation will be correct deductive thinking, but its development, like any other method of therapy, should be under the supervision of a psychotherapist.

Psychologists recommend that people prone to nervousness develop deductive thinking. Simple methods are used for this:

Solving logical problems. The classic method of deductive reasoning is mathematical reasoning. To solve a problem, a person uses logic, and this contributes to the development of the skill of distinguishing a false judgment from a plausible one.
Expanding your horizons. In essence, this is replenishing the knowledge base with any information that is interesting to a particular person. You don't have to read textbooks for this. New information can be obtained by watching films or websites, communicating with other people, traveling.
Development of accuracy. The ability to specify helps to select the correct criterion by which to evaluate phenomena.
Flexibility of mind. A small amount of knowledge contributes to ossification of the mind. Having a limited set of typical situations, a person chooses not the most likely one, but the one that comes to mind first. And since he has little choice, she is unlikely to be suitable.
Observation. This is a tool with which a person replenishes his internal treasury of personal experience. It is on its basis that conclusions are made.

Sometimes you can come across the term "psychological induction", but it does not have a specific definition. Often, induction refers to the manifestation of certain mental illnesses or an affective state.

What it is?

Thinking inductively means moving from a particular case, a separate fact, to a generalization, which is based on coinciding properties that are mandatory for all objects under study. For example, studies of the solubility of ammonium, potassium, calcium, and sodium nitrate in liquids led scientists to believe that all nitrates are highly soluble in water. Inductive thinking is characterized by a transition from a specific image to a generalization of facts and the derivation of general rules.

This means that human thought, at the moment of tracking certain phenomena or studying objects, looks for homogeneous signs or general patterns and forms a single position for them. Observations allow us to come to a general conclusion.

The inductive thought process is not built on the invention of rules for the discovery of scientific truths. Inductive reasoning involves confirming a reliable conclusion based on premises and specific observations. The final argument confirms the truth of the conclusion. A theory is built on the basis of a generalization of explanations.

The method is widely used in science. At the initial stage, it lends itself to research, in contrast to the deductive method, aimed at proving and confirming hypotheses. The inductive act of thought is focused on the creation of new theories that arise during the study of specific facts. The information is descriptive and can be compared.

Relying solely on the inductive thought process without parallel use of deductive reasoning is not recommended. It is best to arrive at a final result that is obtained deductively and confirmed by signs identified through induction.

Using only the inductive method may lead to a false conclusion. For example, everyone knows that sugar, soda and salt dissolve perfectly in water. These are bulk substances. As a result, one can draw the false conclusion that all bulk substances dissolve well in water. Sand is a free-flowing substance, therefore it dissolves well in water. However, it is not.

Disadvantages of the inductive approach

The use of the inductive method has limits. The task of logic is to identify them. Carrying out an analogy is not a demonstrative method, but it makes it possible to search for common features of objects and phenomena. To obtain a reliable result, it is necessary to have a sufficient number of diverse examples to represent the entire group of phenomena.

Given this, inductive inferences often lead to an erroneous conclusion. The use of induction involves working with a consequence that can be caused by different reasons or a combination of them. Therefore, the reliability of the information obtained directly depends on the intellectual abilities of the researcher. When forming conclusions, he relies only on his logic and rationalism.

Failure to separate plausible versions leads to an erroneous conclusion. And since human cognitive capabilities are limited, there is always a risk of analysis based on an erroneous sign and obtaining a false result.

What is the difference between deduction and induction?

Deduction in philosophy is a special way of thinking, using which a person draws logical conclusions based on general information and selects from it the most appropriate development of events for the situation. The use of the deductive method requires the ability to compose logical chains in which one phenomenon consistently follows from the second. This method of processing information became famous thanks to books about Sherlock Holmes, who used it to solve crimes.

The thinkers of the ancient period knew about deduction. Deduction has been used in philosophy to form conclusions based on existing knowledge. Each philosopher had his own idea of correct deduction. For example, Descartes called deduction an intuitive way of obtaining information, which, as a result of lengthy reflection, necessarily leads to the only correct version. Leibniz believed that deduction was the only way to achieve true knowledge.

Deduction is superior to most methods because it performs the following functions:

helps to quickly find the right solution;
used in areas of which knowledge is superficial;
promotes the development of logical thinking;
helps analyze hypotheses, assessing their plausibility;
speeds up thinking.

The disadvantages of the deductive method include:

the inability to apply the method to study new phenomena;
some special cases are very difficult to bring to a common denominator;
The knowledge obtained through deduction is more difficult to assimilate, since a person receives a ready-made answer without bothering to collect preliminary information.

The use of deduction in philosophy allows you to quickly and reliably verify information, provided that the laws of logic are used correctly.

Examples

Inductive way of thinking: the subject of jokes is the so-called “female logic”. When, from one incorrectly spoken word, a conclusion is drawn about the speaker or what he wanted to say with his phrase.

For example: my husband said that I didn’t add enough salt to the salad, my husband noticed that the stain on my T-shirt had not been washed out, my husband does not praise me for the cleanliness of the apartment. Conclusion: my husband thinks that I am a bad housewife. Although, in essence, the conclusion here is not justified. The studied signs only illustrate the husband’s behavior.

The deductive method in this case would look like this: “my husband said that I over-salted the salad, he didn’t like the taste of the salad, the salad wasn’t tasty.” Conclusion: “I don’t cook well, according to my husband.” This is an example of the notorious “female logic”, which often causes scandals in the family.

Application of induction in philosophy

The English encyclopedist and philosopher W. Whewell was J. Mill's main opponent. But he also recognized induction as a necessary and indispensable method of knowledge in philosophy. In the book “Philosophy of Inductive Sciences,” he revised the very essence of scientific knowledge, bringing science out of the realm of the vague and closed into the realm of the accessible and necessary. Thanks to his work, the scientific community was able to conduct research openly. Whewell popularized the word “science” itself, which replaced natural philosophy. The philosopher's rethinking of the theory of induction allowed it to become one of the main research methods.

Researcher K. Popper, in the process of testing hypotheses, assigns key importance to induction. Induction cannot determine whether a statement is true, but it helps accurately select those versions that do not stand up to experimental testing. If, as a result of experiments, some of the theories were confirmed and another part was refuted, those theories that gave a positive result will be preferred. But it should be remembered that induction does not help to find a universal confirmation that will suit all put forward versions.

Model that limits cognition

Induction in philosophy is the deliberate simplification of complex structures to create an understandable picture of the world. When we observe different phenomena, we generalize them. From this we draw conclusions about the connections between phenomena and put them together into a single picture. It allows us to make choices and set priorities, to determine what is important to us and what is not. But if we lose control over the situation and begin to replace facts with our own opinion about them, then we will inevitably begin to adjust everything we see to suit ourselves. Thus, the presence of induction alone limits cognition. After all, as a rule, it is incomplete. Therefore, almost all universal generalizations made with its help imply the possibility of exceptions.