Deductive And Inductive: Types Of Validity, Not Types Of Argument (Essay Sample)

Professor’s Name
Student’s Name
Course
Date
Inductive Reasoning Assignment
Recently I found my uncle, a Texas warden talking about tigers with my dad at home. I became interested in the discussion, as it had been reported some years back that there were more tigers in captivity as compared to those in the wild. I was curious to know which types are native to this particular region and therefore that was my first question to ask him. My uncle answered that all tigers that were in captivity together with those that he had observed in Texas wild have black stripes on orange fur and thus they are the native to this particular area. This statement is an example of strong inductive generalization, and I will focus on explaining why it should not be assumed as entirely correct.
Although all that have been observed by my uncle since he was young in Texas are black striped on orange fur, the existence of white tigers cannot be overlooked. Centered on this, a person can adopt that generalization mentioned in this statement in not accurate although chances of observing white tigers are minimal. This makes my uncle’s conclusion an example of strong induction. Fundamentally, induction is defined as a conclusion, which is backed by evidence largely (Hitchcock 1).
An inductive argument is a type of reasoning in which chances of the conclusion being false are substantial even when all the proofs to support it are true. Contrary to deductive perceptive which from generalization to preciseness, inductive begins with a particular argument and then arrives at a general conclusion (Hitchcock 2). For instance, my uncle first stated that he have only observed precisely the tigers that have orange fur with black stripes which is an accurate statement. It is from this observation that he then generalizes his logic that these types of cats must be natives to Texas.
An inductive generalization statement uses premises that are limited to number of things of a particular kind to conclude about most or all things of that subject or type (Hitchcock 2). For instance, in this example, the evidence used by my uncle was based on his observation only. Such support is inadequate since Texas is a huge location and using one person’s observation as a premise to ascertain that black striped tigers with orange fur are the natives is incorrect. Probably, if the evidence would have been based on environmental causes such as the region climatic condition cannot support other types of tigers then the statement would have been correct.
In evaluating generalization claims, one uses three types of questions. First, one requires verifying whether the premises given are accurate (Hitchcock 2). In this example, one can conclude that the statement made by uncle is correct as he has never seen any other types of tigers. Secondly, one is required to ascertain whether the sample used is broad enough to verify the claim (Hitchcock 2). In case of my uncle although it is based on one person the sample size is sufficient because the captured animals which as earlier indicated form the majority population in of the entire number of tigers in Texas were all black stripped with an orange fur.
Additionally, given that my uncle is a warden and spends most of his time in forest looking after wild animals for over two decades, it can be concluded that it is almost impossible to come across white tigers in that region which gives his statement a solid foundation. Finally, one requires establishing whether the sample is a representative of normal population as a whole (Hitchcock 2). Given that most captured tigers that were found in Texas were from the wild and they represent adequately the population of the ...