Deductive reasoning

(redirected from Deductive argument)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Medical.

Deductive reasoning

Using known facts to draw a conclusion about a specific situation.
Mentioned in ?
References in periodicals archive ?
An especially salient defect of my sketch is that it ignores all considerations of probability, and unrealistically insists on a deductive argument from premises to verdict, whereas the most that is ever demanded, even in a criminal trial, is 'proof beyond reasonable doubt'; that is, an argument whose conclusion is made highly probable by the premises, but not logically implied by them.
This may concern the validity of a deductive argument (and, when coupled with validity, we may ask why the premises are true (or false), which has to do with the soundness of the argument); or, it may concern the strength of an inductive argument (and, when coupled with strength, we may ask why the premises are true (or false), which has to do with the cogency of the argument).
Here "syllogism" is used not in the sense of a series of sentences consisting of the premises and a conclusion, but in the sense of a deductive argument form.
A valid deductive argument, as we have seen, is one in which the truth of the premises necessitates the truth of the conclusion.
Here we have "only pinto beans are in the container" serving as both the conclusion of an inductive generalization and as a premise in an immediately following deductive argument.
A deductive argument takes the same form as a mathematical equation.
A "slingshot" proof suggested by Kurt Godel (1944) has been recast by Stephen Neale (1995) as a deductive argument showing that no non-truth-functional sentence connective can permit the combined use, within its scope, of two truth-functionally valid inference principles involving definite descriptions.
26) In terms of logical form -- the relation between the truth of the premises and the truth of the conclusion -- the truth of the premises of a deductive argument guarantees the truth of the conclusion.
This is a classic case of a deductive argument, given that the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.
Stevenson, on the other hand, conceives of rationality as requiring the ability to engage in abstract deductive argument, and thinks therefore that defects in rationality can coexist with the exercise of inductive intelligence.
Norton argues that TEs in physics are a form of deductive argument involving empirical premises.
His point is this: a computer systems involves physical components that can behave unpredictably, so no deductive argument can guarantee that the system will work perfectly.