INDUCTIVE AND DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS (Case Study Sample)

INDUCTIVE AND DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS NAME: INSTITUTION: 1a: Identify Components of ArgumentsIdentify the component parts of the argument, premises and conclusion, for the passages. Where applicable, highlight key words or phrases that identify a claim as a premise or a conclusion.  1. Sue is pregnant and will give birth to one child. We know already this child has no genetic anomalies. If Sue’s baby is a boy, he will be named Mark. If Sue’s baby is a girl, she will be named Margaret. Sue will have either a boy or a girl. So we know Sue’s baby will be named Mark or Margaret. In order to pick out premises and conclusion from an argument, one is required to first identify the type of argument. There are two types of arguments, deductive argument and inductive argument. Deductive argument is an argument whose premises make its conclusion certain. The truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion. It often seems that inductive arguments are weaker than deductive arguments. This is because there must always remain the possibility of their arriving at false conclusions, but that is not entirely true. With deductive arguments, conclusions are already contained in the premises. This means that we don't arrive at new information .The information shown is one which was obscured or unrecognized previously. Thus, the sure truth-preserving nature of deductive arguments comes at a cost. Inductive arguments are arguments whose premises make its conclusion likely. They are more modest when it comes to the inferential claim. Its inferential claim is that since the premises are true or acceptable, the conclusion is likely to be true or acceptable. The logical relation between the premises and the conclusion is claimed to be less than one hundred percent supporting. In the above paragraph, the argument is deductive. This is because the premises guarantee the truth of the conclusion. The sentence -Sue is pregnant and will give birth to one child-is a premise. The term will in this sentence is an indication of certainty that only one child will be born. We know already this child has no domestic anomalies-This is a premise. If Sue’s baby is a boy, he will be named Mark-premise. If Sue’s baby is a girl, she will be named Margaret-premise. Sue will have either a boy or a girl.-premise. So we know Sue’s baby will be named Mark or Margaret-This is a conclusion and is based on the truth of the paragraphs premises. The premises of the above paragraph are valid and true making the argument a sound deductive argument. If the library has The Lord of the Rings, you won’t find it on the first floor. This is because all fantasy novels are fiction and all works of fiction are housed on the second floor of the library. Of course, I am assuming that all the books are properly shelved at this time. This is a deductive argument. Its premises are valid and based on truth. The word if in the first sentence identifies the claim as a premise. The sentence that follows I is equally a premise as it indicates certainty of occurrence. The phrase of course in the last sentence identifies the claim as conclusion drawn from the validity of its premises. “After a year, brain scans showed that among the walkers, the hippo campus had increased in volume by about 2 percent on average; in the others, it had declined by about 1.4 percent. Since such a decline is normal in older adults, ’a 2 percent increase is fairly significant,’ said the lead author, Kirk Erickson, a psychologist at the University of Pittsburgh. Both groups also improved on a test of spatial memory, but the walkers improved more. While it is hard to generalize from this study to other populations, the researchers were delighted to learn that the hippo campus might expand with exercise” (Span, 2011). The above argument is an inductive argument. This is because it is based on the likely hood of an occurrence. While it’s true that hippo campus had increased in size, it was equally true that other declined in size. It is there cannot be certain that walkers will definitely increase in size. The inferential claims in this argument make the conclusion, that the hippo campus expanding more likely. •1b Because Una has circles under her eyes, is yawning, and looks tired, I’m certain she didn't get much sleep last night. This is an inductive argument. The truth of its premises do not necessary lead to the claim of conclusion. The logical relation between the premises and the conclusion is less than 100% supporting. The reasons as to why Una has circles under her eyes ,is yawning and looking tired does not entirely lead to the conclusion that she did not get much sleep though this could also be a possible reason. •Grace concluded that psychotherapists caused indigestion, because every time she had a session, she left with a horrible stomachache. This is an inductive argument. The premise of the above argument only make the conclusion likely but do not guarantee the conclusion as true. It is possible that the premise of this argument is true, that is, Grace always gets a horrible stomach ache every time she had a session with psychotherapists. However, the real cause of the indigestion does not have to be the psychotherapist’s sessions. •If a bug is a spider, it must have eight legs. A daddy-long legs has six legs, consequently, a daddy-long legs is not a spider. This is a deductive argument. The conclusion is based on premises which are true and which make the conclusion certain. The term consequently is used to draw a conclusion from the premises. The conclusion drawn from the premises is a definitive proof of truth of the premises, that is, for a bug could only be a spider if it has eight legs. 2a ARGUMENT IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS Components of an argument. “You say many women at the most elite colleges intend to ‘put aside their careers in favor of raising children.’ But why shouldn't the raising of children be considered a career as well? Few would deny that being a stay-at-home parent is a terrifically demanding job, requiring unlimited 'people skills' and a total commitment to a workweek that recognizes no concept of overtime, not to mention a paycheck. The term 'working mother' is a redundancy. No woman need feel any guilt for opting to fill her days with whichever activities give her the greatest joy and fulfillment” (English, 2005). There are four main parts of an argument, these are; claims, counterclaims, reasons and evidence. A claim is a way of stating your main point. It tells what you think is true about a topic based on your knowledge and your research. Counter claims on the other hand are point based on evidence and reason against the claim. Reasons explain why one supports the claim or the counter claim. The evidence is the supporting proof for the reasons given. This could be in either hard copy or soft copy. In the above paragraph, the claim is that, raising children is not considered as career. Therefore women put aside their careers to raise children. However the writer argues that raising children should be considered as a career as it has similar attributes to any other career. This is a counter claim as it argues against the consideration of raising children as not being a career. The writer gives such reasons as raising children being very demanding and requiring unlimited people skills and total commitment to a workweek with no concept of overtime. The evidence given is joy and fulfillment derived from raising children. The author concludes therefore that raising children is a career and no woman should feel guilty doing it. The reasons for making this argument are that while that raising children is demanding and requires skills, much satisfaction and joy is derived just like any other career. 2. “The attorney general does not merely head up the Justice Department. He is responsible for ensuring that America is a nation in which justice prevails. Mr. Gonzales's record makes him unqualified to take on this role or to represent the American justice system to the rest of the world. The Senate should reject his nomination” (The New York Times, Editorial, 2005). The writer begins by defining the roles of the attorney general as not merely being the head of the justice department but also has responsibility of ensuring justice prevails in America. This is a claim and by doing this he defines the roles of Gonzales. He however makes a counter claim against the qualifications of Gonzales which makes him disqualified for the post he holds and representing the American justice system. The author concludes that the nomination of Gonzales should be rejected. The reasons for making the argument are that he has not served well the responsibility of maintaining justice in America. Construct one original inductive argument and address the following: 2Identify the conclusion and the supporting reasons within the argument. 3Using 75–100 words, offer an explanation or justification for why the argument is an inductive argument. The National bank of Nigeria was robbed. The managing director needed money to pay off her gambling debts. She was seen buying a gun two days ago, and later se...