Economics homework help

Economics homework help. !
This is a graded discussion: 25 points possible due Aug 3 at 1:59am
Week 4 Discussion: Distinguishing Inductive and Deductive
Reasoning
57 57
Required Resources
Read/review the following resources for this activity:
Click on the following tabs to review the concepts that will be addressed in this activity:
The Basic Structure of Deductive and Inductive Arguments
Click on the following links to view argument examples:
Initial Post Instructions
For the initial post, address the following:
Textbook: Chapter 8, 9, 17 (Introduction)
Lesson
Minimum of 1 scholarly source (in addition to the textbook)
Find and post examples of deductive and inductive arguments.
For each example, evaluate its logical strength, using the concepts and ideas presented in the textbook
readings, the lesson, and any other source you find that helps you to evaluate the validity (deductive) or
strength (inductive) of the argument. You can use examples from the text, or you can find examples
elsewhere.
Editorials and opinion columns are a good source, as are letters to the editor. Blogs will also often
be based on arguments.
A valid structure is the way in which an argument is put together that
assures it will pass the test of logical strength.
Valid Argument Structures Deductive Inductive
!
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 1 of 48
Search entries or author
Follow-Up Post Instructions
Respond to at least two peers or one peer and the instructor. Further the dialogue by providing more
information and clarification. Do you agree with their analysis – be very specific about why you agree or
disagree.
Writing Requirements
Course Outcomes (CO): 3, 4
Due Date for Initial Post: By 11:59 p.m. MT on Wednesday
Due Date for Follow-Up Posts: By 11:59 p.m. MT on Sunday
Is it inductive or deductive? Explain why.
Does it pass the tests of validity and strength? Explain.
Use mapping and evaluative techniques to make sure it is an argument.
Minimum of 3 posts (1 initial & 2 follow-up)
Minimum of 2 sources cited (assigned readings/online lessons and an outside source)
APA format for in-text citations and list of references
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
Jun 22, 2020
!
Greetings Students:
You are only required to post an initial answer post and ONE follow-up post in each required
discussion, each week.
different days with the first post occurring by Wednesday. If there are extenuating
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 2 of 48
Edited by Sonja Sheffield (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) on Jun 22 at 12:39pm
When determining whether an argument is inductive or deductive, you must assume that all premises
are true. Then you must see whether the conclusion would probably or necessarily follow. You are not
determining whether the premises are true but judging the kind of reasoning based on the argument’s
structure. In other words, you “deduce”.
Example Inductive:
In 2010, an oil drilling rig leased by British Petroleum (BP) was damaged from an explosion, and oil
began gushing out of a broken pipe into the Gulf of Mexico. In the six months after the accident, more
than 600 sea turtles have been found dead along the Gulf Coast. Since this is a much higher amount
than what is typical for the season, it is reasonable to conclude that the sea turtle deaths are a result of
the oil spill.
The issue is whether the 600 sea turtle deaths are caused by the 2010 British Petroleum oil spill. The
conclusion is that the 600 sea turtle deaths are caused by the 2010 British Petroleum oil spill. The first
premise is that in 600 sea turtles have been found dead along the Gulf Coast within six months of the
2010 British Petroleum oil spill. The second premise is that 600 dead sea turtles is a much higher
amount than what is typical for the season. This is inductive.
Example Deductive:
Why wouldn’t a woman consider herself a feminist? Even my husband calls himself a feminist. If he can
call himself that, then every woman should be able to call herself that. Every woman should consider
herself a feminist.
The issue is whether every woman should consider herself a feminist. The implied conclusion is that
every woman should consider herself a feminist. The first premise is that my husband calls himself a
feminist. The second premise is that if my husband considers himself a feminist, then every woman
should consider herself a feminist. This is a deductive argument.
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
Tuesday
!
Students,
Check out this video on Deductive vs. Inductive Arguments
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 3 of 48
It seems your browser is blocking 3rd party session cookies which are required for the
Kaltura application. To resolve this issue, please update your settings to allow 3rd party
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
Tuesday
!
Editorials and opinion columns are a good source, as are letters to the editor. Blogs will also
often be based on arguments.
Use mapping and evaluative techniques to make sure it is an argument.
Is it inductive or deductive? Explain why.
Does it pass the tests of validity and strength? Explain.
In other words,DO NOT go to a website and provide an argument that has already informed of
the type of argument that it is.
For example if you went to this type of website
(https://examples.yourdictionary.com/deductive-reasoning-examples.html
(https://examples.yourdictionary.com/deductive-reasoning-examples.html) ) you would find the
following:
Deductive Reasoning Examples – DO NOT GO
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 4 of 48
HERE!
Instead, go to Op Ed (NY Times and others) or Letters to the Editor or a Blog based on an
argument for your post where “YOU” have to determine the type of argument it is.
Prof. Sheffield
Inductive Reasoning: My mother is Irish. She has blond hair. Therefore, everyone from
Ireland has blond hair.
Deductive Reasoning: My mother is Irish. Everyone from Ireland has blond hair.
Therefore, my mother has blond hair.
Inductive Reasoning: Most of our snowstorms come from the north. It’s starting to snow.
This snowstorm must be coming from the north.
Deductive Reasoning: All of our snowstorms come from the north. It’s starting to snow.
Therefore, the storm is coming from the north.
Inductive Reasoning: Maximilian is a shelter dog. He is happy. All shelter dogs are
happy.
Deductive Reasoning: Maximillian is a shelter dog. All shelter dogs are happy. Therefore,
he is happy.
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/148682)
Ashley White
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/148682)
Tuesday
!
Hi Professor and Class!
First example:
It’s sunny in Singapore. If it’s sunny in Singapore, then he won’t be carrying an umbrella. So, he won’t be
carrying an umbrella(Fieser, 2018).
This example is a deductive argument. It has logical strength because it’s sunny so he won’t be carrying an
umbrella. Both premises are valid to the conclusion that comes after “So”. It passes the test of validity
because it’s sunny in Singapore and if it’s sunny he won’t be carrying an umbrella provide support for the
conclusion.
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 5 of 48
Second example:
Every time I’ve walked by that dog, it hasn’t tried to bite me. So, the next time I walk by that dog it won’t try
to bite me(Fieser,2018).
This example is an Inductive argument. Its strength depends on its premises. For example, the argument
would be stronger the more times the person walked by the dog and didn’t get bit. Its logic to think the dog
has never tried to bite him, so he won’t next time. The argument could get stronger or weaker if certain
circumstances changed in the premises. Inductive arguments can change based off of different evidence
and deductive arguments don’t.
References
Facione, P. & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Thinking critically. 3 . Ed. Pearson:Boston, MA.
Fieser, J. (2018). Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved July 28, 2020, from
https://iep.utm.edu/ded-ind/
rd
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/148682)
Ashley White
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/148682)
Tuesday
!
Hi Professor,
I’ll give it another shot!
This example from the book I believe is deductive because it has two true premises and then a true
conclusion. Everyone who owns a car needs car insurance is premises 1 and Joe just purchased a car
is the 2nd premises. Conclusion would be he needs insurance.
EX: Everyone who owns a car needs car insurance. Joe just purchased a car. Therefore Joe needs
car insurance.
I think the example below is an example of an Inductive argument because just like the one above the
argument could get weaker or stronger if things changed in the premises.
EX: The cat scratches me everytime I walk by it. Tomorrow when I walk by the cat will scratch me.
References
Facione, P. & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Thinking critically. 3 . Ed. Pearson:Boston, MA. rd
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 6 of 48
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
Yesterday
!
Hello Ashley, thank for your repost.
Remember, when identifying premises the first premise is premise (without the s); the same for
the second.
The first argument is positively deductive. The second argument is inductive since there is a
good chance that that cat will probably scratch when you walk by since it has occurred so many
times in the past.
We are learning that there are two crucial thinking skills. In the first, inductive reasoning, one
observes a set of facts from several viewpoints. Leaving out some facts or adding new ones
might lead to some particular interpretation. Inductive reasoning helps to make a generalized
conclusion based on individual reflections or datasets. For example, the observation, “this tree
has a shadow” is an individual observation. The generalized conclusion that “all trees have
In deductive reasoning, you go the other way around. You start at some general premise. This
could be anything from mathematical physics such as “the sum of the internal angles of a
quadrilateral is 360°. This is the way critical thinking works. You find out how to solve the
questions with the help of your teammates. Here again one needs to check opinions based on
your assessment of the situation. Also, if you study the assumptions that led to the situation, you
might discover a lot of fallacy.
Determine if the following are inductive or deductive:
1. If God exists there is good in the world. God exists, so there is good in the world.
2. Many inexplicable phenomena have eventually been explained by science, so
consciousness will eventually have a scientific explanation.
3. Since every action has an equal and opposite reaction, this action will have an equal and
opposite reaction.
4. Which of the two argument types (i.e. deductive or inductive) seem to add something new
to the premises? Which seems to have its conclusion contained within its premises?
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/138709)
Britney Parkerton
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/138709)
Tuesday
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 7 of 48
!
Hello Professor Sheffield and class,
Inductive Example
“The sun rose yesterday, the day before yesterday, the day before the day before yesterday, and 1,000,000
days before that. Therefore, the sun will rise tomorrow” (Johnson, 2016, pg.5).
The issue is that the sun will rise tomorrow. The claim is that the sun will rise tomorrow. The premise is that
the sun rose yesterday, the day before yesterday, the day before the day before yesterday, and 1,000,000
days before that. According to Facione (2016), “We use inductive reasoning skills when we draw inferences
about what we think is probably true” (pg. 176). This is inductive reasoning because it is probable that the
sun will rise tomorrow, but it is not for certain.
Deductive Example
“All muscles are made out of living tissue. All humans have muscles. Therefore, all humans are made out
of living tissue” (Wilson, 2016).
In our textbook Facione (2016) discusses how we use deductive reasoning to “assume truth of a set of
beliefs to a conclusion which cannot be false if those beliefs are true” (pg. 156).This is an example of a
deductive argument. The conclusion is that all humans are made from living tissue. The first premise is all
muscles are made from living tissue. The second is that all humans have muscles, and therefore all
humans are made from living tissue. If we assume that the two premises are true, then the claim is true as
well.
Reference
Facione, P. & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Thinking critically (3 Edition). Pearson Education, Inc.
Johnson, G.S. (2016) Argument and Inference. An Introduction to Inductive Logic. Massachusetts Institute
hl=en&lr=&id=8yDYDQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=%22inductive+argument%22+examples&ots=
5BL7lsSIYM&sig=gVifJeZWiI_MqWtcuzSTYRV11iw#v=onepage&q=%22inductive%20argument%22%
hl=en&lr=&id=8yDYDQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=%22inductive+argument%22+examples&ots=5BL7lsSIYM&s
ig=gVifJeZWiI_MqWtcuzSTYRV11iw#v=onepage&q=%22inductive%20argument%22%20examples&f=false)
https://www.mscc.edu/documents/writingcenter/Deductive-and-Inductive-Reasoning.pdf
(https://www.mscc.edu/documents/writingcenter/Deductive-and-Inductive-Reasoning.pdf)
rd
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 8 of 48
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/138709)
Britney Parkerton
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/138709)
Yesterday
!
Hello Professor Sheffield and class,
Here are examples of inductive and deductive reasoning from opinion articles. I apologize for
misunderstanding the instructions.
Inductive Example
“The economy isn’t driven by stock prices or corporate profits — it only works because of workers. If
they’re doing well, the economy is doing well” (Linden, 2020).
The claim is that if workers are doing well, the economy is doing well. The first premise is that the
economy isn’t driven by stock prices or corporate profits. The second is that the economy only works
because of workers. According to Facione (2016), “We use inductive reasoning skills when we draw
inferences about what we think is probably true” (pg. 176). This is inductive reasoning because it is it is
probably true that the economy is driven by workers, and not the stock prices or corporate profits,
however, it is not for certain. This argument would need more solid evidence to prove that the claim is
true. I do not believe this argument has a strong validity.
Deductive Example
“Amazon is making a killing from this crisis. Almost literally. Jeff Bezos’s net worth has grown by more
than \$24 billion (https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/apr/15/amazon-jeff-bezos-gains-24bncoronavirus-pandemic) since the crisis started since everyone is at home trying to avoid going to the
store and ordering everything online” (Cummings, 2020).
The is that Amazon is making a killing from this crisis. The first premise is that Jeff Benzo’s net worth
has grown by more than \$24 billion since the crisis started. The second premise is that everyone is at
home trying to avoid going to the store and ordering everything online. In our textbook Facione (2016)
discusses how we use deductive reasoning to, “assume truth of a set of beliefs to a conclusion which
cannot be false if those beliefs are true” (pg. 156). This is deductive reasoning because if it is true that
Jeff Benzo’s net worth has grown more than \$24 billion since the crisis, and everybody is ordering
everything online, then Amazon is most definitely making a killing from the crisis. I do believe this
argument has strong validity. The author provided us with the amount of money Benzo’s next worth has
grown since this crisis started, and it is highly probable that a lot of people are avoiding the stores right
now to avoid contracting COVID-19.
Reference
Cummings, R. (2020, May 5). Working at Amazon was Always Painful. Now it’s Terrifying. Buzzfeed
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 9 of 48
(https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/rinacummings/amazon-warehouse-was-grinding-me-down-thencoronavirus)
Facione, P. & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Thinking critically (3 Edition). Pearson Education, Inc.
Linden, Michael. (2020, April 10). Opinion: When People Can’t Work, You See What The Economy
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/michaellinden/coronavirus-shows-us-workers-are-theeconomy (https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/michaellinden/coronavirus-shows-us-workers-are-theeconomy)
rd
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
Yesterday
!
Brittney, thank you for reposting. And no worries. These days most of us have so much to think
The first argument is absolutely inductive; the second deductive. I know for sure about the
second one since I have Amazon stock and it is going up (YAY).
Can you see the different ways the premises support the conclusion in the following arguments?
Deductive
All philosophers have a brain.
Bob is a philosopher.
Therefore, Bob has a brain.
Inductive
Most philosophers have a brain.
Sam is a philosopher.
So, Sam probably has a brain.
This distinction describes how the premises support the conclusion. In deductive arguments,
the truth of the premise(s) guarantees the conclusion. That is, it is impossible for the conclusion
to be false if we assume the premises are true in a good/valid deductive argument.
In inductive arguments, the premise(s) provide probabilistic support. That is, it is improbable, but
possible, that the conclusion is false in good/strong inductive arguments.
Argument 1 is a deductive argument because the conclusion must follow if we assume the
premises are true. In example 1, it is impossible for the conclusion (i.e. Bob has a brain) to be
false if the premises are assumed true. So, it is a valid deductive argument.
In Argument 2, it’s improbable that the conclusion is false if we assume the premises are true.
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 10 of 48
It’s possible, but unlikely, that Sam doesn’t have a brain.
Identify the following arguments as inductive or deductive
1. In my experience, most people are happier when they have the Epicurean goods of
friends, self-sufficiency, and time for reflection. Therefore, I think you will probably be
happier if you focus on getting these three goods.
2. You cannot achieve peace of mind until you recognize what is under your control and
What others think of you isn’t ultimately under your control precisely because it’s their
thinking. Therefore, don’t worry about what others think of you (Stoicism).
3. All tigers are animals. Tigger is a tiger. Therefore, Tigger is an animal.
4. Humans usually use new technologies in times of war to destroy instead of build. The
atomic bomb is a great example. Therefore, we will probably use strong artificial
intelligence to destroy in times of war (if we ever invent it).
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/138709)
Britney Parkerton
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/138709)
5:23pm
!
Hello Professor Sheffield,
Argument 1:
The claim is that if you focus on the three goods listed that you will probably be happier. The
premise is that most people are happier when they have the Epicurean goods of friends, selfsufficiency, and time for reflection. I would say this argument is inductive because it is probable
that having goods like friends, self-sufficiency, and time of reflection would make a person
happier, therefore, if we assume that the probability that the premises are true, then the
conclusion is most likely true as well, but it is not certain.
Argument 2:
The claim is that you should not worry about others think of you. The first premise is that you
cannot achieve peace until you recognize what is under your control, and what isn’t under your
control, and then not worry about what isn’t under your control. The second premise is that
what others think of you isn’t ultimately under your control precisely because it’s their thinking.
I believe this example is deductive reasoning. This is because if we assume that the two
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 11 of 48
premises are in fact true, then the claim that you shouldn’t worry about what others think of
you is true as well.
Argument 3:
This argument is deductive reasoning. The claim is that Tigger is an animal. The first premise
is that all tigers are animals. The second is that Tigger is a tiger. If both premises are true, then
that would make the claim true as well.
Argument 4:
The claim is that we will probably use strong artificial intelligence to destroy in times of war (if
we ever invent it). The first premise is that humans usually use new technologies in times of
war to destroy instead of build. The second is that the atomic bomb is a great example. This is
an inductive argument because the premises are probably true, but it is not certain that if we
do invent strong artificial intelligence, we would use it to destroy in times of war.
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/143371)
Chloe Williams
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/143371)
Tuesday
!
Chloe Williams
Week 4 Discussion
Inductive Argument:
We are currently under going a pandemic in today’s world because of the Coronavirus. I know that you
guys are very familiar with this. This virus has caused many different hardships challenges around the
world, including people being out of work. When the U.S. hit an all time high in the number of cases of the
virus, it was discovered that over 40 million Americans have filed for unemployment (Cohen, 2020). Since
the unemployment cases have never been that high, it is reasonable to conclude that those cases are a
result from the high rise of Coronavirus cases.
The issue is whether the 40+ million unemployment cases are causes behind the high number in the
Coronavirus cases. The conclusion is that the 40+ million unemployment cases are caused by the high rise
of Coronavirus cases. The first premise is that there was over 40 million Americans filing for unemployment
once America was hit hard with the Coronavirus. The second premise is that 40+ million unemployment
cases is extremely high and is not normal on a regular basis. This is inductive.
Deductive Argument:
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 12 of 48
Why doesn’t everyone from Louisiana know how to cook Gumbo? I’m only 23 and even I know the
ingredients and instructions to a good Gumbo dish. Louisiana is known for it’s Southern Creole foods,
especially Gumbo. If I can cook gumbo and creole foods, everyone that was born and raised in Louisiana
should be able to cook Gumbo and other popular creole foods.
The issue is whether everyone from Louisiana should be able to cook Gumbo and other creole foods. The
implied conclusion is that everyone from Louisiana should be able to cook Gumbo and other creole foods.
The first premise is that I’m only 23 and knows how to cook Gumbo. The second premise is that if I can
cook Gumbo, everybody else that’s from Louisiana should be able to cook Gumbo as well. This is a
deductive argument.
References
Facione, P. & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Thinking critically. 3 . Ed. Pearson:Boston, MA.
Cohen, Patricia. 2020. Still Catching Up: Jobless Numbers May Not Tell Full Story. New York
rd
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
Yesterday
!
Chloe, thank you for your post for this week and providing examples of both deductive and inductive
arguments. Also, thank you for providing a story from the New York Times.
I would absolutely agree that the first argument on COVID-19 is probably true but not necessarily
and, as a result, makes it inductive. The second argument (I like the argument very much!), is
deductive. As an aside is it strong or valid?
Identify the following arguments as inductive or deductive:
1. We are going to have at least one day in which the temperature rises above 100 in Austin
because this has happened in Austin for at least the last 300 years.
2. Consciousness is either a physical thing or a nonphysical thing. Since it is not a physical
thing, it must be nonphysical.
3. Since the universe is like a watch, it is probably designed.
4. There are only two people in this house: Blaise and Catherine. Neither wear glasses.
Therefore, Blaise doesn’t wear glasses.
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 13 of 48
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/138071)
Danin Sibert
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/138071)
Tuesday
!
Hello class,
My first example is a letter to the editor of the Washington Post titled, Maryland’s online option for receiving
mail-in ballots could overwhelm election workers. In this letter, Gina M. Angiola explained the issues that
may arise in Maryland come election time. Her argument was essentially that:
Online ballots have to be hand copied by election officials. Last year it took Montgomery County 5 days to
count their ballots. This year there will be more mail in ballots than last year (because of COVID). We are
only allowed 10 days to count all votes. So only the citizens that are in rural areas and have no other option
but online voting should be able to place online votes.
I labeled this argument as inductive. It is inductive because although the facts stated were noteworthy,
there could be different factors that could change the conclusion. Facione and Gittens (2016) explain, “As
long as there is the possibility, however remote, that a highly probable conclusion might be mistaken even
though the evidence at hand is unchanged, the reasoning is inductive” (p 176). Due to COVID, the
government might hire more election officials to process the online ballots therefore making it beneficial for
more citizens to participate in online voting. Since I was able to find a counterexample I do not feel that the
argument is valid.
My second example I found was an op-ed on USA Today. Paul Rosenzweig argued why William Barr is an
unethical lawyer. One of the articles arguments was that:
William Barr is an attorney general. All lawyers are bound to follow the ethical rules adopted by the State
Bar Association where they are licensed to practice law. Barr has been dishonest and deceitful, and has
also interfered with the administration of justice. Therefore, Barr’s license to practice law should be
revoked.
I labeled this as deductive. This is deductive because all three premises rely on each other and it is a
logical argument. “Deductive reasoning moves with exacting precision from the assumed truth of a set of
beliefs to a conclusion which cannot be false if those beliefs are true” (p 159). Assuming that all the
premises were true, the conclusion followed accordingly and the argument was valid.
Angiola, G. M. (2020, July 28). Opinion | Maryland’s online option for receiving mail-in ballots could
overwhelm election workers. Retrieved July 29, 2020, from
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/letters-to-the-editor/marylands-online-option-forreceiving-mail-in-ballots-could-overwhelm-election-workers/2020/07/28/1939d6b8-d020-11ea-826b7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 14 of 48
cc394d824e35_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/letters-to-the-editor/marylands-onlineoption-for-receiving-mail-in-ballots-could-overwhelm-election-workers/2020/07/28/1939d6b8-d020-11ea-826bcc394d824e35_story.html)
Facione, P. & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Thinking critically. 3rd. Ed. Pearson:Boston, MA.
Rosenzweig, P. (2020, July 28). The unethical William Barr: 27 lawyers, 4 powerful allegations of
dishonesty and deceit. Retrieved July 29, 2020, from
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/07/28/william-barr-unethical-deceitful-attorneygeneral-column/5517466002/ (https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/07/28/william-barr-unethicaldeceitful-attorney-general-column/5517466002/)
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
Yesterday
!
Danin, thank you for posting for this week and providing arguments from the Washington Post
editorial.
Yes, I can go with the first argument being inductive some people living in Maryland should
“probably” submit an online ballot. The second argument.
So many students what is the purpose of logic? Well let’s think about for a moment since a branch
of philosophy )critical thinking) is a form of logic.
Logic is a tool for discovering the truth and why things are connected through lines of inference.
These lines of inference allow us to make determinations on truth and falsehood, validity and
invalidity, and much more. Most arguments are composed of two important parts: premises and
conclusions which delineate deductive and inductive arguments.
It is often best that students do a formal analysis (determining premise(s) & conclusion) for
arguments since it not only reinforces argument analysis skills but also provides the best means for
correctly identifying fallacies.
Determine the type of fallacies for the following: Indicate the issue first and then premise(s) and
conclusion followed by the type of fallacy.
#1 Smoking is harmful to your health. Smoking is bad for you.
#2 Smoking causes lung cancer, heart disease, stroke, and other cardiovascular diseases.
#3 There is no reason why you should not buy a life insurance policy. You should buy a life
insurance policy.
#4 No plan is in place to ensure that all troops are safe from sexual assault. Women should not try to
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 15 of 48
enter the military at this time.
Reference
Cengage Learning: Critical Thinking eText.
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/118358)
Monica Hernandez
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/118358)
Yesterday
!
Good Morning Professor and Class,
A deductive argument is an argument that is intended by the arguer to be deductively valid, that is, to
provide a guarantee of the truth of the conclusion provided that the argument’s premises are true(Cline
2019). This point can be expressed also by saying that, in a deductive argument, the premises are intended
to provide such strong support for the conclusion that, if the premises are true, then it would be impossible
for the conclusion to be false. All arguments are either valid or invalid, and either sound or unsound; there
is no middle ground, such as being somewhat valid.
The author Facione (2016) does a great job of breaking down the definition as, “assume truth of a set of
beliefs to a conclusion which cannot be false if those beliefs are true” (pg. 156).
Inductive Reasoning:
All cars in this town drive on the right side of the street (https://image-seeker.com/s/?q=street) . Therefore,
all cars in all towns drive on the right side of the street (https://image-seeker.com/s/?q=street)
This is inductive reasoning because it makes the claim from the specific to the general- which is the cars on
the right side and the rule of the street (https://image-seeker.com/s/?q=street) .
Strength: The conclusion is true. Since the premise is base on the fact that cars drive on the right side of
the street (https://image-seeker.com/s/?q=street) . The possibility of the conclusion being wrong as in
driving on the right is not there. Therefore the strength of the argument is good.
Deductive reasoning:
All cats have a keen sense of smell. Fluffy is a cat (https://image-seeker.com/s/?q=cat) , so Fluffy has a
keen sense of smell.
This is a deductive argument because its premise is based on general or universal and explains a specific
case.
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 16 of 48
The argument is valid because Fluffy being a cat (https://image-seeker.com/s/?q=cat) makes him have a
keen sense of smell. The conclusion is base on the premise that cats have a keen sense of smell. The
chances of the conclusion being illogical from the premise are not there. Therefore, it is a valid argument.
References:
Cline, A., 2019. The Difference Between Deductive And Inductive Reasoning In Arguments. [online] Learn
Religions. Available at: <https://www.learnreligions.com/deductive-and-inductive-arguments249754#:~:text=A%20deductive%20argument%20is%20one%20in%20which%20true,a%20definitive%20pr
oof%20truth%20for%20the%20claim%20%28conclusion%29.> [Accessed 29 July 2020].
Facione, P. & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Thinking critically. 3 . Ed. Pearson:Boston, MA. rd
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/64315)
Dijana Rahmanovic
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/64315)
Yesterday
!
Exampe 1
“There is not a single era in U.S. history in which the police were not a force of violence against black
people. Policing in the South emerged from the slave patrols in the 1700 and 1800s that caught and
returned runaway slaves. In the North, the first municipal police departments in the mid-1800s helped
squash labor strikes and riots against the rich. Everywhere, they have suppressed marginalized
populations to protect the status quo” (Kaba, 2020).
This argument is deductive. The argument is: “there is not single era in the U.S. history in which the police
were not a force of violence against black people”. The supporting sentences provide data from different
eras and areas in the U.S. that the police existed. Without each of these supporting reasons, the
argument’s claim that “there is not a single era” would fall flat, as only one era or one moment in history
would be used as an example. The more examples of specific times in history the police were weaponized,
the stronger the speaker’s claim. This argument passes the test of validity. The supporting reasons all
match the conclusion and none of them are questioned for accuracy.
Example 2
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 17 of 48
“In Tanzania alone, 1.4 million people are living with HIV and in Africa as a continent as much as 26 million
people are suffering from this disease… In Sub-Saharan Africa women represent 58% of all people living
with HIV or AIDS and for women in their reproductive years this is the most common reason why they die,
either because of illegal abortions or from complications during childbirth… The failure to provide young
is resulting in devastating consequences” (Ring, 2016).
This argument is inductive. The argument is “the failure to provide young people proper sex education and
consequences”. The supporting sentences are used to back up this claim. They can also stand alonewithout each other- in order to still provide adequate support to the claim. This argument passes the test of
strength. The supporting arguments give little room for the conclusion to be counter-argued.
References
article 1: Kabba, M. (2020). Yes we mean literally abolish the police. New York Times. Retrieved from:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abolish-defund-police.html
(https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abolish-defund-police.html)
article 2: Ring, A. (2016). Let’s talk: the importance of sexual education. Girl’s Globe. Retrieved from:
Facione, P. & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Thinking critically. 3 . Ed. Pearson:Boston, MA. rd
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
Yesterday
!
Hello Dijana, thank you for providing arguments from either a news feed or a blog.
I concur that the order of your arguments, i.e., deductive first, and then inductive.
Determine the fallacy of each of the following:
1. We should either pay our teachers better salaries or admit that we don’t care about our
children’s education. (False Dilemma)
2. Of course she’s rich! Just look at that diamond ring she is wearing. (Hasty Generalization)
3. I love visiting Wyoming because I enjoy traveling in the West. (Begging the Question)
4. He went to college and came back a pothead; college corrupted him. (Post Hoc)
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 18 of 48
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/154614)
Jasmine Burgess
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/154614)
Yesterday
!
Deductive Reasoning
“We just learned yesterday that an Amazon executive resigned over an unfair firing of whistleblowers who
are trying to keep themselves and their workers safe. Amazon does not need much of an excuse to fire us;
it happens all the time. Anyone can be fired without any notice or reason- being a few minutes late, getting
written up for not making rate, demanding more gloves and masks (Cummings, 2020).
The conclusion is that anyone can be fired without notice or reason. The first premise is being a few
minutes late for the work shift. The second premise is getting written up for not making rate. The third
premise is asking for more essential supplies like gloves and masks. Deductive reasoning is, “to identify
and secure elements needed to draw reasonable conclusions” (Facione & Gittens, 2016, p. 34). The
opinion in this article uses deductive reasoning because the writer feels that Amazon fires their employees
very quickly over what she believes to be minor reasons.
Inductive Reasoning
“Australia is an early test case of how the world’s affluent societies will bend, or buckle, or rebuild under the
pressure of temperature changes likely to hit the rest of the well-off world later in the century” (Mack, 2020).
happening in Australia are creating fires and causing structural damage, the rest of the world will
experience these changes as well. “Decision making in terms of uncertainty is considered inductive
reasoning” (Facione & Gittens, 2016, p. 176). How can the author assume that just because Australia is
experiences natural disasters because of temperature changes that the rest of the countries in the world
will fall subject to the same conditions? This opinion does not yield certainty.
Cummings, R. (2020, May 5). Working at Amazon was Always Painful. Now It’s Terrifying. Buzzfeed News.
Retrieved 7/29/20 from https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/rinacummings/amazon-warehouse-wasgrinding-me-down-then-coronavirus
rd
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 19 of 48
Facione, P. & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Thinking critically (3 Edition). Pearson Education, Inc.
Mack, D. (2020, January 25). Opinion: My Country Is on Fire. Soon the Whole World Will be. Buzzfeed
News. Retrieved 7/29/20 from https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/davidmack/australia-on-fire-soonwhole-world-will-be
rd
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
9:14am
!
Hello Jasmine, thank you for posting this week and providing examples of inductive and deductive
arguments.
Regarding your deductive argument: When I read the argument consider that what you indicated at
the at the first premise, “being a few minutes late for the work shift”, that’s not really the premise.
Premises are complete sentences or overweight statements. For example the actual premise is
anyone can be fired without any notice or reason. A second premise is anyone can be fired being a
few minutes late. Another premise is anyone can get written up for not making rate. In the final
premise is anyone can be fired who demand more gloves and masks. Does this make sense? Do
you have a better understanding?
For your inductive argument: you did not identify the premises for that particular argument on
Australia.
In the following, identify the type of fallacy.
1. “America: love it or leave it.”
2. “Since scientists cannot prove that global warming will occur, it probably won’t.”
3. “If we pass laws against fully automatic weapons, then it won’t be long before we pass laws
on all weapons, and then we will begin to restrict other rights, and finally we will end up living
in a communist state. Thus, we should not ban fully automatic weapons.”
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/129972)
Brittany Varnes
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/129972)
Yesterday
!
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 20 of 48
Hi Professor and Class,
Inductive Reasoning
When I visited this company last Monday, all employees had ties. Today is Monday and the employees are
wearing ties. The employees wear ties every Monday.
This statement is an example of inductive reasoning because it concludes that the company employees
wear ties on Mondays. According to Chamberlain (2020), an argument is strong if both its premises and
conclusion are true; also known as a cogent argument. It can be observed that it is customary for
employees to wear ties on Mondays, hence the premises are true. This is also true for the conclusion that
the employees will have ties next Monday. Therefore, the argument is strong. Doyle (2019) asserts that
inductive reasoning accounts for repeated patterns, from which it narrows down to make a hypothesis that
can be evaluated.
Deductive Reasoning
Bachelors comprise of unmarried men. Socrates is a bachelor. Socrates is an unmarried man.
Sound statements require that both premises of an argument must be true for it to be valid. According to
Facione and Gittens (2016), a deductively valid statement is made up of two premises that are true and are
joined to make a true conclusion. The example above has true premises, hence the conclusion is also true.
The argument is therefore valid.
References
Chamberlain. (2020). Week 4 Lesson: Logical Reasoning – How to Do
It. https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/pages/week-4-lesson-logical-reasoning-how-to-do-it?
module_item_id=9052136
Doyle, A. (2019). Inductive Reasoning Definition and Examples. Balance Careers.
https://www.thebalancecareers.com/inductive-reasoning-definition-with-examples 2059683
Facione, P. A., & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Think critically (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson.
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
3:26pm
!
Thanks Brittany, for your post for this week. Nice arguments and identified correctly.
Let’s look at validity, strength or weakness.
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 21 of 48
Indicate whether the following arguments are valid, invalid, strong or weak:
1 Audrey Hepburn was a great actor. All female actors, if they were great, were beautiful. Therefore
artery have burned was beautiful.
2 The cat is genetically healthy, fit well, provided with water and treated with affection. Therefore the
cat is striving.
3 If the plant is treated well and given the right nutrients it will thrive. The plant is thriving. Therefore
the plan is being well treated and given the right nutrients.
4 The man at the station, and the taxi driver, have both been wonderful. I am going to love everyone
in this town.
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/99157)
Wei Wen Chiang
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/99157)
Yesterday
!
Inductive Example
“The EU insists that if the UK wants tariff-free access to the EU’s enormous internal market, then it must
make commitments to obey certain EU laws” (McGee, 2020).
This example is an inductive argument because it requires new premises to determine the conclusion. If UK
makes commitment to obey EU laws, then UK can access EU’s internal market for free; but we do not know
what UK will do. I think this argument is valid we can determine the conclusion on the facts.
Deductive Example
“Indian Matchmaking itself offers a window into the lifestyles of an elite class of Indians who can enlist the
service of a top-tier matchmaker, and in some cases, fly them to the other side of the world. This is not
something regular families do, so status is already built into the narrative” (Sangal, 2020).
This is a deductive example. Regular family does not offered matchmaking in India. Indian matchmaking is
only for elite classes. If you are offered matchmaking, you must be in the elite class. This argument is valid
because the conclusion matches the premise.
Facione, P. & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Thinking critically. 3 . Ed. Pearson:Boston, MA.
McGee, L. (2020, July 29). Unfortunately for Boris Johnson, much of Europe has moved on from Brexit.
Retrieved July 29, 2020, from https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/29/uk/eu-brexit-intl-gbr/index.html
rd
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 22 of 48
(https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/29/uk/eu-brexit-intl-gbr/index.html)
Sangal, A. (2020, July 23). ‘Indian Matchmaking’ presents painful truths about skin color and love in Indian
culture but does nothing to challenge them. Retrieved July 29, 2020, from
https://www.cnn.com/style/article/indian-matchmaking-netflix-intl-hnk-beauty/index.html
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
9:27am
!
Ann, thank you for your post for this week and identifying deductive and inductive arguments from
CNN news.
Let me just tell you that when you use abbreviations, for example EU,
one must first write out what those two letters mean and then in the rest of the sentence or
paragraph they can use the abbreviation. For example European Union needed to be written out
first.
Is your argument “the EU insist that if the UK want carefree access to the EU’s enormous internal
market…” Even after reading the entire article I could come up with premises and conclusion. Also
you did not identify any premises or conclusion. So it’s difficult for me to determine whether it is a
doctor or not.
I also read the article from Sangal, and I came up with several premises and several conclusions.
I would recommend that you reread both of those articles and provide the premises and the
conclusion. That will help to determine whether it’s inductive or deductive or not.
Determine the fallacies in the following:
1. “Government is like business, so just as business must be sensitive primarily to the bottom
line, so also must government.”
2. “A book is pornographic if and only if it contains pornography.”
3. “We should not believe President Clinton when he claims not to have had sex with Monica
Lewinsky. After all, he’s a liar.”
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/127931)
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 23 of 48
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/127931)
Yesterday
!
Hello,
Example 1:
John is ill. If John is ill, then he won’t be able to attend our meeting today. Therefore, John won’t be able to
attend our meeting today (Fieser, 2018).
This is an example of deductive argument. Both premise of this argument is valid to the conclusion. The
argument passes the Test of Logical Strength, because John is ill and he won’t be able to attend the
meeting today. According to the textbook, a valid argument passes the Test of Logical Strength
(Facione,2016).
Example 2:
The police said John committed the murder. So, John committed the murder. (Fieser, 2018).
This is an example of inductive argument. It is inductive because there could be other factors that could
change the conclusion. The argument is invalid. The police made an educated guess.
Reference:
Facione, P. & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Thinking critically. 3rd. Ed. Pearson:Boston, MA.
Fieser, J. (2018). Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://iep.utm.edu/ded-ind/
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/152005)
Melissa Shetto
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/152005)
Yesterday
!
Hello Professor and class,
Distinguishing between Inductive and Deductive Reasoning
Inductive Reasoning
Trump’s personal and political interests are aligned with Russia’s.
In the electoral context, Trump is perfectly fine with Russia attacking U.S. democracy if it benefits
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 24 of 48
him. This is of course not to say Trump is fine with Russian bounties on U.S. troops. He very well might
sincerely believe it isn’t happening.
Rather, the point is that Trump has reasons for generally not wanting to probe too deeply into stories
that might expose Russian intentions toward the U.S. in a particularly malign light when he may be hoping
to gain from more Russian undermining of U.S. democracy. Those reasons prioritize self-interest over the
national interest. That’s a key context for explaining his sheer disinterest in getting to the bottom of the
bounties.
This portion of this article indicates that it is an Inductive argument because the writer’s premises
are not based on concrete facts or proven truths but rather lean towards a possible truth. They certainly
seem to support the claim that President Trump is ignoring some information about Russia’s interference
because it may serve his own political interests in the long run. The writer may actually be shading light on
something that is possibly true and therefore readers, may be required to seek further information about
this claim before ruling it as true or false. The writer’s premises seem truthful, make logical sense are
relevant to his claim, and seem to support the claim.
Inductive reasoning as explained by Facione & Gittens (2016) simply means that as long as there
is a possibility, regardless of how remote it is, then a conclusion is probably true.
Deductive Reasoning
I have no patience with those declaring workers cast from their jobs by COVID-19 will shirk work if
given unemployment benefits. As if “they” need to be cattle-prodded out of their lethargy.
If we’re so desperate to reignite our economy, let’s recall that more than 70% of it is based on consumer
spending and that millions of those “consumers” are going broke and facing imminent eviction. Homeless
folks don’t make great customers.
Let’s give people work rebuilding our infrastructure, not punish them for events beyond their
control. That’s the job of an effective government.
The above statement reflects a Deductive Argument whereby the writer is highlighting that our
economy largely depends on consumer spending to thrive and therefore unemployment benefits will ensure
people have purchasing power, thus be able to reboot our economy after the COVID- 19 pandemic is over.
I say it is a Deductive argument because the first premise is a solid fact that can easily be proven to be true
which proves the truth of the conclusion that unemployment benefits will have a positive impact on our
economy in the long run.
References
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 25 of 48
1. Sargent, G. (2020, July, 29). Three big takeaways from Trump’s awful new admission about Putin.
2. Facione, P. & Gittens, C., A. (2016). Think Critically.(3 ed.). Pearson.
3. Monroe, B., K. (2020, July, 29). Unemployment benefits: Demeaning attitude. The Seattle
Times.https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/unemployment-benefits-demeaning-attitude/
(https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/unemployment-benefits-demeaning-attitude/)
rd
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
3:22pm
!
Melissa, thank you for your post for this week and providing the various arguments. Good examples
and they are correct.
Some arguments offer one or more examples and support overgeneralization. Consider this: women
in earlier times were married very young. Julia in Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet was not even 14
years old. In the middle ages, 13 was the normal age of marriage for Jewish woman. And doing
Roman times, many Roman women were married at age 13 or younger.
How could this argument be improved?
Derek Weatherby took a job at Schrock’s, a grocery store in St. Louis, to help pay his way through
college. As a student debt mounted, he took a break from school, planning to go back when his
financial situation improved. But with the economy still stagnant years after the financial crisis, Derek
has found that many of the other employees at Schmocks are college graduates themselves, some
with degrees from prestigious schools. It seems that lots of college graduates can’t find work that
pays any better than the job that Derek already has.
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 26 of 48
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/95642)
Aliyah Castleberry
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/95642)
Yesterday
!
Professor and Class,
Example 1:
All of the managers at my office have associates degrees. Therefore, you must have an associate’s degree
to become a manager.
This is an example of inductive reasoning. In this example, the worker is assuming that because all of the
managers at her office have associate degrees, that in order to become a manager there, you must have
an associates degree as well. In this example, the person speaking is using the information that is available
to them, even if it is not complete. Based upon this information, the person will try to determine the most
likely outcome.
Example 2:
My boss said the person with the highest sales would get a raise at the end of the month. I have the highest
sales, so I am looking forward to a raise.
This is an example of deductive reasoning. In this example there are two statements that have true pieces
of information. There is also an assumption that is based on the two pieces of information. As long as the
first two pieces of information are true, the assumption should also be true.
References:
Deductive Reasoning: Definition and Examples. (2019, May 7). Retrieved July 29, 2020, from
Facione, P. A., & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Think critically (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson.
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
9:19am
!
Hello Aliya, thank you for your post for this week.
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 27 of 48
Edited by Sonja Sheffield (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) on Jul 30 at 3:11pm
The first example you provided, “All of the managers at my office have college degrees. Therefore,
you must have a college degree to become a manager.” comes directly from a website that identifies
the argument. This is not what you were asked to do.
Reconstruct the following argument. Identify those that are instances of a correct inductive
form and those that are fallacious. If the background knowledge required to evaluate the
argument is missing, discuss what would be needed.
Both the American Medical Association and the American dental Association have formally endorsed
fluoridation of drinking water. Fluoridation promotes dental welfare and is not generally harmful to
people’s health.
Thanks.
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/145323)
Ashlyn Nichols
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/145323)
Yesterday
!
Hello Everyone,
Before starting this assignment I did research on deductive and inductive arguments because I felt
like I was lacking some knowledge. It’s a bit confusing at first but after breaking the definitions down and
reading multiple examples I finally understand the concept. “An inductive argument is an argument that is
intended by the arguer to be strong enough that, if the premises were to be true, then it would
be unlikely that the conclusion is false” (Deductive and Inductive Arguments). “A deductive argument is an
argument that is intended by the arguer to be deductively valid, that is, to provide a guarantee of the truth of
the conclusion provided that the argument’s premises are true” (Deductive and Inductive Arguments).
Taking those definitions and developing examples.
Example Inductive:
Michael Phelps says olympic system neglects mental health. Phelps managed to earn 28 olympic
metals across five games labeling him as the poster child. Phelps stated “I don’t think anyone jumped in to
ask us if we were OK. As long as we were performing, I don’t think anything else really mattered”
(Futterman, M., 2020). After years of competing in the olympics he grew to learn he wasn’t the only one
facing these challenges. Since then many Olympians have come forward to explains they also have
struggled with mental health. “The metaphor I like to use is when it comes to the spectrum of sports
performance, we think the top is hitting a grand slam to win the game and the bottom is striking out, when
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 28 of 48
in fact the actual bottom is not wanting to be alive” (Futterman, M., 2020).
The issue is Olympians are put under a great amount of stress neglecting their mental health. Over
the course of their training and performance more olympians speak up about the stress they are put under
which neglects their mental health. Since they individuals are held to higher standards and their bodies are
pushed to the extreme, it is reasonable to conclude that the olympics is damaging peoples mental health.
Example Deductive:
Going through elective college classes can be challenging due to the lack of motivation. But, political
science all of the quizzes have been easy. Therefore, the final exam will be easy. I have taken every quiz
and received an 90% or better. My classmates are also passing each quiz with a B+ or higher.
The issue is that every quiz has been easy to where everyone is passing the class with ease. The
implied conclusion is that the final exam will be easy. The first premise all of the quizzes in political science
have been easy. The second premise is the final exam will be easy, taking into consideration my
classmates and I are all passing each quiz with a B+ or higher.
References:
Deductive and Inductive Arguments. (n.d.). Retrieved July 29, 2020, from https://iep.utm.edu/ded-ind/
Facione, P. & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Thinking critically. 3 . Ed. Pearson:Boston, MA.
Futterman, M. (2020, July 29). Michael Phelps: ‘I Can’t See Any More Suicides’. Retrieved July 29, 2020,
from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/29/sports/olympics/michael-phelps-documentary-weight-ofgold.html?action=click
rd
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
2:25pm
!
Ashlyn, thank you for providing both deductive and inductive arguments from the New York Times.
It is understandable that deductive and inductive are difficult but if you had an opportunity to review
the video I provided on the differences, I think you would understand a bit better. The differences
between the two are quickly identified: For example, a deductive argument a conclusion that is
supported by the premises to be determined as true. Whereas an inductive argument the conclusion
based on the premises is probably true.
In your examples of deductive and inductive arguments, can you detail the premise(s) and the
conclusion for each please. You forgot that part. Thank you.
Decide whether the following argument is an acceptable inductive generalization or a fallacy.
Identify the premises and the conclusion of the argument. In the case of a fallacy, explain
what is wrong. Discuss what sort of additional background information, if any, is needed.
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 29 of 48
Most lab tests [for rabies] only bats that are submitted because they are rabies suspect. Results
often reported in a manner that implies that these bats are representative of bats in general. An
extreme case involved a claim that 50% of the stated bats were rabid because one of only two bats
examined tested positive.
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/140314)
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/140314)
Yesterday
!
Hi Professor and Class,
Deductive Example
All humans are mortal. Socrates is a human, therefore, Socrates is a mortal.
In this example, the speaker asserts that the premises are true and therefore, the conclusion must be true.
This passes the test of validity. A deductive argument is valid such that a conclusion must be true if the
premises are true. A valid argument passes the logical strength test
Inductive Example
After studying only one night beforehand, I’ve aced the last three quizzes in this class. So even though I’ve
studied only one night for this class’s upcoming quiz, I’ll probably ace it, too.
In this example, the person is presenting their evidence that by studying only night before an has led to
them acing the last three quizzes, thus, these premises support the probable truth of the conclusion. The
argument is inductive because there is a good chance that the person will ace the next quiz, after studying
one night beforehand, since it has happened for all the three past quizzes.
References
Facione, P. & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Thinking critically. 3 . Ed. Pearson:Boston, MA.
Gutting, G. (2011, July 6). Arguing From the Facts. The New York Times.
https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/06/arguing-from-the-facts/.
rd
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 30 of 48
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
2:13pm
Edited by Sonja Sheffield (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) on Jul 30 at 3:12pm
!
Christine, thank you for providing both a deductive and an inductive argument from the New York
Times.
Decide whether the following argument is an acceptable inductive generalization or a fallacy.
Identify the premises and the conclusion of the argument. In the case of a fallacy, explain
what is wrong. Discuss what sort of additional background information, if any, is needed.
At the University of Pennsylvania, psychiatrists conducted a study to determine the social factors
that affect the well-being of coronary patients. There were 93 patients in the study; slightly more than
50% of them had pets of some kind (dogs, cats, fish, and one iguana). At the end of a year, one third
of the patients who did not own pets died, but only three animal owners succumbed. The
psychiatrists concluded that pet ownership may have a positive effect on the health of humans.
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/154119)
Juliana Shahly
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/154119)
Yesterday
!
Hello Professor and class,
Inductive Argument example:
“All sunflowers are attracted to bees. Therefore, all bees attract sunflowers.”
According to Facione and Gittens (2016), inductive type of reasoning is used when inferences are drawn
about what may be probably true, which in this case is bees attracting sunflowers.
Based on logical strength, this argument presents a fact, which is, “All sunflowers are attracted to bees”
and then a conclusion is made about the argument, which is, “Therefore, all bees attract sunflowers.” The
conclusion here is based on the fact that “All sunflowers are attracted to bees.”
In regard to inductive reasoning, the observation of facts is first and then the conclusion is made based on
those facts (Shin, 2019).
Deductive Argument example:
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 31 of 48
“All Syrian women cook and clean. My sister Sara is a Syrian woman, so she cooks and cleans.”
This is a deductive argument because this argument states a fact that is true, which is, “All Syrian women
cook and clean” and the conclusion has to be accepted, which is, “My sister Sara is a Syrian woman, so
she cooks and cleans.” This makes the argument valid because Sara being a Syrian woman cooks and
cleans, which is based on the fact that, “All Syrian women cook and clean.”
References:
Facione, P. & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Thinking critically. 3 . Ed. Pearson:Boston, MA.
Shin H. S. (2019). Reasoning processes in clinical reasoning: from the perspective of cognitive
psychology. Korean journal of medical education, 31(4), 299–308. https://doi.org/10.3946/kjme.2019.140
rd
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/102153)
Caitlyn Pienkowski
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/102153)
11:38am
!
Hi Juliana,
The examples you provided were great! You were precise with the connection of the example and left
no room for openness! Some examples I came across were open-ended, where within the example of
“If the river continues to rise, then the carpet will get wet”, anything can make the carpet wet, which left
the statement open. However with your examples, it is known that bee’s are attracted to sunflowers,
which is a precise inductive argument!
Good post!
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
2:39pm
!
Juliana, thank you for your post.
Reconstruct the following argument. Identify those that are instances of a correct inductive form and
those that are fallacious. If the background knowledge required to evaluate the argument is missing,
discuss what would be needed.
Reconstruct the following argument. Identify those that are instances of a correct inductive
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 32 of 48
Edited by Sonja Sheffield (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) on Jul 30 at 3:13pm
form and those that are fallacious. If the background knowledge required to evaluate the
argument is missing, discuss what would be needed.
For at least 30 years, even as oil has more than doubled and tripled in cost, economic advisors to
both major political parties have agreed that the best way to make consumers conserve energy is to
impose taxes, ranging from \$0.50 per gallon of gas to five dollars a barrel on imported oil. Higher
taxes on gas and oil use will be the best way to encourage conservation.
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/102153)
Caitlyn Pienkowski
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/102153)
Yesterday
!
Hello!
Deductive and inductive arguments refer to the process by which
someone creates a conclusion as well as how they believe their conclusion to be true (Wilson, 2016).
Deductive argument is to think of syllogisms like: If A=B and C=A, then B=C; For example: If the river
continues to rise, then the carpet will get wet (Gittens, 2015). The strength of this example can pass as
weak because the carpet necessarily can be wet from anything inside the home, like a leaking sink or if the
toilet overflowed.
Inductive argument uses a set of specific observations to reach an overarching conclusion; For example:
My neighbor’s cat hisses at me daily. At the pet store, all the cats hiss at me. Therefore, all cats probably
hate me (Wilson, 2016). The logic behind this example can pass as weak as well because if a cat is
unfamiliar with someone, naturally they will be on offense.
References
Gittens, P.F.C. A. (2015). THINK Critically. [VitalSource Bookshelf]. Retrieved
from https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9780133914351/
(https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9780133914351/)
https://www.mscc.edu/documents/writingcenter/Deductive-and-Inductive-Reasoning.pdf
(https://www.mscc.edu/documents/writingcenter/Deductive-and-Inductive-Reasoning.pdf)
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 33 of 48
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
2:31pm
Edited by Sonja Sheffield (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) on Jul 30 at 3:14pm
!
Caitlyn, thank you for your post for this week; However, the inductive argument provided indicated
that it derived form Wilson, 2016; however, it does not.
Reconstruct the following argument. Identify those that are instances of a correct inductive
form and those that are fallacious. If the background knowledge required to evaluate the
argument is missing, discuss what would be needed.
In March 2011, the Washington Post conducted a poll asking whether the (Afghanistan) was no
longer worth fighting. Two thirds of those polled answered yes. My roommate was one of the people
polled, so she probably agreed that the war was no longer worth fighting.
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/156890)
Lynne Gallagher
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/156890)
Yesterday
!
This newspaper article summarized various opinions regarding COVID and going back to school on
campus. One argument stated that children need to be back in school. Since children need to be education,
if younger children are being taught at home, a parent needs to be there to help support them. If a parent
has to be home with their children in order to learn, one parent will need to quit their job. However, not all
households have 2 parents and can live off one income, therefore children need to be back in school.
The issue is whether or not children should be in person or online for the upcoming school year. The
conclusion is that children need in person schooling. The first premise is that children need supervised and
assisted with their schooling. The second premise is that if children need to be supervised and assisted, it
will be a parents responsibility to now do so during the day, which will cause one parent to have to be
home. The third premise is that because some households cannot survive without a parent working, then
the children need to be back in school. This is an example of a deductive argument.
My next example is that around between one to two years, children start to develop identifiable language
skills. My son is one and a half, a toddler, therefore it is highly probable that he will soon start speaking
strings of words.
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 34 of 48
The conclusion is that my son will soon start speaking. The first premise is that children learn to speak and
string words together between one and two years of age. The second premise is that my son is between
one and two years of age. This is an example of an inductive argument.
Facione and Gittens defines inductive reasoning as “a large, important and quite diverse group of
inferences justify the confident belief that their conclusion is very probably true given that their premises are
all true. In my example, the reasons are that my son is a toddler and that toddlers start speaking around
one or two. There is a high probability, although not exact certainty that he will soon start speaking in
strings of words, given that both of my premises are true.
Facione, P. A., & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Think critically (3rd ed.). Pearson.
Harris, R. L. (2020, July 25). Home-Schooling Won’t Kill Us. Covid-19
Might.’ Https://Www.Nytimes.Com/#publisher (https://www.nytimes.com/#publisher)
.https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/25/opinion/coronavirus-school-reopening.html?
(https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/25/opinion/coronavirus-school-reopening.html?
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
9:37am
!
Lynne, thank you for your post for this week and providing your arguments from the New York
Times.
In one of the premises I think you meant to write, “… Children need supervision and assistance. . .”
not supervised and assisted, yes? Please be mindful of grammar.
Nice example of an inductive argument. The reason it’s inductive is that is probably true but not
necessarily.
1. “Fred, the Australian, stole my wallet. Thus, all Australians are thieves.”
2. “Satanist Quarterly reports that 87% of Americans are atheists. Therefore, there is no god.”
3. “Immigration to California from Mexico increased. Soon after, the welfare rolls increased.
Therefore, the increased immigration caused the increase in welfare rolls.”
4. “Protesting against racial injustice only causes more of it to occur.”
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 35 of 48
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/131729)
Loc Nguyen
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/131729)
Yesterday
!
Hello Professor and class,
Inductive Argument
The rise of COVID-19 in the United States tracks almost precisely the decline of Donald Trump’s approval
numbers and the political lesson from this is clear. The more damage the Wuhan coronavirus does to
America, the harder it is for the President to get reelected (Carlson, 2020).
The issue is whether President Trump will be reelected is caused by the outbreak of COVID-19. The
conclusion is that it is harder for the President to get elected if COVID-19 continue to rise. The first premise
is the decline of Donald Trump’s approval numbers. The second premise is that the more damage the
Wuhan coronavirus does to America, the harder it is for the President to get reelected. This is inductive.
Deductive Argument
And although the Labor Department’s weekly jobless claims report showed the number of Americans filing
for unemployment benefits rose for the first time in nearly four months, continuing claims — or the people
receiving benefits after an initial week of aid — shrank by more than 1 million, suggesting employers are
recalling laid-off workers (Henny, 2020).
The issue is whether the number of unemployment benefits are decreasing. The implied conclusion is that
employers are recalling laid-off workers. The first premise is that the number of Americans filing for
unemployment benefits shrank by more than 1 million. The second premise is that employers are recalling
laid-off workers. This is a deductive argument.
References
Carlson, T. (2020). Tucker Carlson: Big Tech censors COVID-19 video featuring doctors. Foxnews.
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/big-tech-censors-covid-19-video-tucker-carlson
(https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/big-tech-censors-covid-19-video-tucker-carlson)
Henney, M. (2020). Kudlow maintains ‘V-shaped’ economic recovery still intact despite coronavirus
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 36 of 48
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
2:20pm
!
Loc, thank you for determining whether the two arguments arguments you provided from Fox News
are deductive or inductive.
Nice work on determining the inductive argument pertaining to Trump. The second argument is
indeed deductive (hoping that the numbers are accurate).
Decide whether the following argument is an acceptable inductive generalization or a fallacy.
Identify the premises and the conclusion of the argument. In the case of a fallacy, explain
what is wrong. Discuss what sort of additional background information, if any, is needed.
Jonathan has to travel to New York from Chicago. He is a nervous traveler, so he compares
statistics over the past 10 years on accidents involving buses, trains, automobiles, and planes on
routes between the two cities. Jonathan determines that a bus is safer in terms of fewer lives lost
than any of the other forms of travel. As he is about to purchase his ticket, however, he sees a
newspaper story about a bus accident in which six people died. Jonathan decides not to buy the bus
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/139028)
Brian Tipton
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/139028)
Yesterday
!
Good evening Professor Sheffield and class,
I chose to use two examples from our readings. The first example I chose is definitely inductive as it does
not have true facts to back up the conclusion that was stated. There are many possibilities that could have
come in to play with the outcome of the example. The example suggests because he is dressed as a
hunter that the only conclusion is that it had to be due to a hunting accident.
A man is found dead of a gunshot wound to the stomach, his body in a seated position at the base of a tree
in a forest. It is deer hunting season.
My second example is deductive reasoning. The example can only have three true outcomes. Either the
brother and sister have at least one same parent or both same parents. It states a fact that can be backed
up as the two people involved are siblings.
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 37 of 48
John is Susan’s younger brother. So, they must have the same mother or the same father.
Bradford, A. (July 25, 2017) Deductive vs. Inductive Reasoning.https://www.livescience.com/21569-
deduction-vs-induction.html (https://www.livescience.com/21569-deduction-vs-induction.html)
Facione, P. & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Thinking critically. 3 . Ed. Pearson:Boston, MA. rd
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
3:24pm
!
Hello Brian, thank you for your post for this week and providing the deductive and inductive
Some arguments offer one or more examples and support overgeneralization. Consider this: women
in earlier times were married very young. Julia in Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet was not even 14
years old. In the middle ages, 13 was the normal age of marriage for Jewish woman. And doing
Roman times, many Roman women were married at age 13 or younger.
This argument generalizes from three examples – Juliet, Jewish women in the Middle Ages, and
Roman women during the Roman empire – two “many” or most women in earlier times.
You will find it very helpful to write short arguments in a way with the premises and the conclusion in
order to see exactly how they work.
When do premises like these adequately support a generalization?
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 38 of 48
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/120562)
Dianne Cruz
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/120562)
Yesterday
!
Hello Class,
Deductive reasoning requires to start with a few general ideas called premises and apply
them to a specific situation. Inductive reasoning uses a set of specific observations to reach a conclusion.
Example 1:
A coffee shop owner observes that a few customers are waiting to enter when the store opens each day
and decides to open an hour earlier on weekdays.
This is an example of deductive reasoning, the first premise is that customers are waiting outside to enter.
The second is that if the shop opens an hour early the customers will not have to wait. Deductive reasoning
is “Using specific observations to reach a general conclusion” (Doyle, 2020).
Example 2:
After reviewing their numbers, development executives at a college believe that professionals working in
the financial sector are the best donors. They direct their two most effective staff members to target alumni
working in finance when it comes time to plan their next fundraising strategy” (Doyle, 2020)
This is an example of inductive reasoning, it uses a general idea to reach a specific conclusion.
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/120562)
Dianne Cruz
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/120562)
Yesterday
!
References:
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 39 of 48
Doyle, A. (2020, July 05). What Is Deductive Reasoning?
https://www.thebalancecareers.com/deductive-reasoning-definition-with-examples-2063749
(https://www.thebalancecareers.com/deductive-reasoning-definition-with-examples-2063749)
Wilson, R. (2016). Deductive and Inductive Reasoning.
https://www.mscc.edu/documents/writingcenter/Deductive-and-Inductive-Reasoning.pdf]
(https://www.mscc.edu/documents/writingcenter/Deductive-and-Inductive-Reasoning.pdf%5D)
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
9:30am
Edited by Sonja Sheffield (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) on Jul 30 at 3:15pm
!
Hello Diane, thank you for your post this week. Good examples of arguments.
Reconstruct the following argument. Identify those that are instances of a correct inductive
form and those that are fallacious. If the background knowledge required to evaluate the
argument is missing, discuss what would be needed.
The following argument by a fictional character supports the use of folk medicines:
I know they have been well reported of and many wise persons have tried remedies providentially
discovered by those who are not regular physicians and have found a blessing in the use of them. I
may mention the imminent Mr. Wesley [the founder of Methodism], who, thought I hold not together
with his Arminian doctrine, nor with the usages of his institution, was nevertheless a man of God.
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/115159)
Jessica Woods
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/115159)
Yesterday
!
Deductive Reasoning
“If Richard graduated with honors, then Richard maintained a GPA of 3.2 or higher. It is not the case that
Richard maintained a GPA of 3.2 or higher. Therefore, Richard did not graduate with honors.” (Facione,
2016). This argument does pass the test of validity and strength because it follows the “denying the
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 40 of 48
consequent” argument template in the text. This example deduces that since Richard did not maintain a 3.2
GPA, he did not graduate with honors.
Inductive Reasoning
“A man is found dead of a gunshot wound to the stomach, his body in a seated position at the base of a
tree in a forest. It is deer hunting season. Except for not wearing an orange safety vest, he is dressed like a
hunter. His hunting rifle, never been fired, lies on the ground at his side. The evidence strongly suggests
that his death resulted from a hunting accident.” (Facione, 2016). Inductive reasoning is an umbrella term
for making inferences to come to a conclusion. This is a very good example of inductive reasoning because
the reporter inferred the cause of death based on the way the victim was dressed, and where he was
found. I do not think this example passes the test of validity because the argument is based on an
assumption. The validity of the argument can be threatened with an investigation of the death.
References
Facione, P. & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Thinking critically. 3 . Ed. Pearson: Boston, MA.
Knachel, M. (2020, May 18). 1.4: Deductive and Inductive Arguments. Retrieved July 30, 2020, from
https://human.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Philosophy/Book:_Fundamental_Methods_of_Logic_(Kna
chel)/1:_The_Basics_of_Logical_Analysis/1.4:_Deductive_and_Inductive_Arguments
(https://human.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Philosophy/Book:_Fundamental_Methods_of_Logic_(Knachel)/1:_The_
Basics_of_Logical_Analysis/1.4:_Deductive_and_Inductive_Arguments)
rd
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
3:33pm
!
Jessica, thank you for your post for this week and identifying both deductive and inductive
arguments. Correct on both.
Test Your Understanding with Valid and Invalid
For each of the following deductive arguments, determine whether it is valid or invalid.
1. If Mahatma Gandhi was a woman, then Mahatma Gandhi was a female. But Mahatma
Gandhi was not a woman. Therefore Mahatma Gandhi was not a female.
2. Nine is greater than four, and four is greater than six. Thus nine is greater than four.
3. René Descartes is now the U.S. President. Thus René Descartes is now the U.S. President.
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/147419)
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 41 of 48
Elijah Wiggin
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/147419)
12:04am
!
Deductive reasoning- All humans have cells, and all cells have DNA. Therefore all humans have DNA in
their body. This is a valid argument because it is logically correct. All humans do have cells and all cells do
have DNA. So it is true that all humans have cells and DNA.
Inductive reasoning- My Ford truck is black. I have friends with black Ford trucks. Therefore all Ford trucks
are black. This is an invalid claim that all Ford trucks are black. There is no information or facts to back up
that claim.
Reference
Betts, J. Deductive Reasoning Examples. Retrieved July 29, 2020.
https://examples.yourdictionary.com/deductive-reasoning-examples.html
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
3:27pm
!
Elijah, thank you for your post for this week.
Decide which of the following arguments is a case of affirming the consequent ior not.
1. If it is some of the beads will be pollinating the flowers. The visa pollinating the flowers.
Therefore it is summer.
2. If it is spraying the snowdrops will be out. The snowdrops are out. Therefore it is spring.
3. . If the plant is treated well and given the right nutrients it will thrive. The plan is thriving.
Therefore the plan is being well treated and given the right nutrients.
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/157292)
Marija Mozuraityte
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/157292)
12:45am
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 42 of 48
!
Hello Class,
The two major types of reasoning are inductive and deductive. These refer to the process by which
someone creates a conclusion and how much they believe their own conclusion. Some examples are as
follows.
Inductive:
The past five Marvel movies have been really good, therefore the next movie will also good. Even though
this syllogism overlaps, it does not mean it’s true. This is not enough correlation between one movie and
another to compare it as if it’s the same thing.
Deductive:
All art is an imitation of nature. Meaning that music is art. Therefore, music is an imitation of nature. – this
example represents a correct correlation as the two concepts share the same properties.
References:
Facione, P. & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Thinking critically (3 Edition). Pearson Education, Inc.
wilson, Ronald. Deductive and Inductive Reasoning , 2016,
www.mscc.edu/documents/writingcenter/Deductive-and-Inductive-Reasoning.pdf
(http://www.mscc.edu/documents/writingcenter/Deductive-and-Inductive-Reasoning.pdf) .
rd
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
2:16pm
Edited by Sonja Sheffield (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) on Jul 30 at 3:17pm
!
Marija, thanks for your post and providing arguments.
Reconstruct the following argument. Identify those that are instances of a correct inductive
form and those that are fallacious. If the background knowledge required to evaluate the
argument is missing, discuss what would be needed.
What kind of argument is Wicker using against North? Is Wicker justified?
After so much lying, even for purposes North considers patriotic, his protestation that he now only
wants to tell the truth aren’t worth much. Why should he be considered believable, even under oath,
when he testified under oath that he had so often considered other values more important than
truth?
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 43 of 48
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/84538)
Scott O’Malley
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/84538)
12:52am
!
Prof. Sheffield and class,
Inductive:
This is an example of inductive, and the first issue is whether students saved more money graduating in
3 years. the conclusion is that NYU believes students do. The first premise is the 20% of students who
graduated in 3 years. The second premise is more students are graduating earlier than before. You can
argue about the claim of 1 year less of college saves student’s money. You can argue that with more time
in class with extra classes, the less time for other activities such as work. Having less income makes
college less affordable in 3 years.
Deductive:
EX. John wanted to eat a fruit. He opened the fridge and saw celery, carrot, and a granny smith. He knows
carrots and celery are not fruits. He knows granny smith is an apple. He will eat the Granny Smith because
all apples are fruit.
The issue is do we consider all granny smiths a fruit. The implied conclusion is that granny smith is an
apple and all apples are fruit. Both of the facts are true and logical. Therefore he is able to eat the granny
smith because it is a fruit.
Gittens, P.F.C. A. (2015). THINK Critically. [VitalSource Bookshelf]. Retrieved
from https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9780133914351/
Harris, E. A. (2017, February 17). College Costs Too Much? N.Y.U. Paves Way to Graduate Faster. The
1. NYU is planning to help more students finish their degrees in three years versus the traditional four.
large numbers of students were graduating early, they concluded that graduating early is a good way
to make college more affordable
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 44 of 48
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
3:31pm
!
Scott, thank you for your post for this week. Great examples, specifically the one about the UY
students and it is indeed inductive. Your second example is also deductive as indicated.
Test Your Understanding with Valid and Invalid
For each of the following deductive arguments, determine whether it is valid or invalid.
1. Some dogs are mammals. Some dogs are poodles. Thus some mammals are poodles.
2. Either the former U.S. president George W. Bush was not a professional baseball player or he
was not a famous rock singer. But he was a famous rock singer. Thus George W. Bush was
not a professional baseball player.
3. The word ‘wet’ has three letters in it. Thus the word ‘wet’ has an odd number of letters in it.
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/72553)
Navjeet Mattu
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/72553)
1:21am
!
Hello Everyone,
Deductive: With things changing daily due to the corona virus and the increase rate of cases in Chicago,
Mayor Lori Lightfoot has put restrictions regarding travel outside of Chicago. She made it it mandatory to
quarantine after travel to 22 states that are listed as risky. If one does not quarantine after travel to those
states, they will be fined (Byrne, 2020).
The claim in this article states people who travel outside of Chicago to 22 states listed as risky will have to
self-quarantine for 2 weeks to reduce COVID cases in Chicago. Anyone who fails to do so will have to pay
a fine. The first premise is that anyone traveling from Chicago to one of the 22 states has to quarantine.
The second premise is if one does not self-quarantine, they will be fined. In conclusion, to lower COVID-19
rates in Chicago, the Mayor requires people who travel to these 22 states to self-quarantine.
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 45 of 48
Inductive: I came across this article a while back and always found it interesting. During spring season in
Chicago, around 5 million birds migrate through Chicago to other states and countries. Due to migrating,
several birds die due to natural reasons and some die due to running into glass buildings. Since Chicago’s
skyline is mostly made of glass, it causes a lot of birds to get hurt from running into glass windows during
this time of the year (Briscoe & Dampier, 2019).
The main issue in this news article is that birds are dying in Chicago more often in spring season. The first
premise is that birds die to natural causes and running into glass windows/buildings. The second premise is
that the Chicago skyline has several glass buildings. I believe this would be inductive. It could be correct
given the strength of the arrangement, but if more facts and other information was given on this, this can
change its arguments strength.
Reference:
Briscoe, T., & Dampier, C. (2019, April 04). As many as a billion birds are killed crashing into buildings each
year – and Chicago’s skyline is the most dangerous area in the country. Retrieved July 30, 2020, from
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/breaking/ct-met-migratory-bird-collisions-chicago-20190402-
story.html
Byrne, J. (2020, July 14). Lightfoot adds Iowa to Chicago’s quarantine list, won’t rule out Wisconsin if
needed. Retrieved July 30, 2020, from https://www.chicagotribune.com/coronavirus/ct-coronavirus-chicagolori-lightfoot-iowa-quarantine-20200714-74o2kjsmvzfrtpk3lphhamflgm-story.html
Facione, P. & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Thinking critically. 3 . Ed. Pearson:Boston, MA. rd
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) Sonja Sheffield (Instructor)
2:03pm
!
Hello Navjeet, thank you for your post for this week and providing examples of both deductive and
inductive arguments from news feeds.
Arguments based on samples share a common form called inductive generalization. Other names
for the sample form a simple deduction, induction by enumeration, and statistical generalization.
Inductive generalizations arguments from the particular to the general. They have a characteristic
that has been inaccurately attributed to all inductive reasoning. The premises of inductive
generalizations are about particular cases (the cases that make up sample), though their
conclusions are generalizations about a population. Moreover, inductive generalization is such a
common form of inductive argument that those who define induction is arguing from the particular to
the general might be excused from focusing on this one important type.
Decide whether the following argument is an acceptable inductive generalization or a fallacy.
Identify the premises and the conclusion of the argument. In the case of a fallacy, explain
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 46 of 48
Edited by Sonja Sheffield (https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/97891) on Jul 30 at 2:06pm
what is wrong. Discuss what sort of additional background information, if any, is needed.
A nationwide poll the day after a presidential election called registered voters on their landline
and 61 percent of registered voters actually voted.
All the members of my fraternity have tickets to our school’s football game this weekend. Therefore
the game is sure to be sold out.
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/144435)
Lorika Roche
(https://chamberlain.instructure.com/courses/65138/users/144435)
1:41am
!
Hello Professor and class,
Inductive Reasoning
“By threatening unemployment benefits, Republicans risk sending the economy over a cliff” (Editorial
Board, 2020). The editorial board opens their argument with this statement as the title, then continues to
mention the \$600 weekly unemployment Covid-19 supplement that was enacted by the Government
months ago and its expiration date come the end of July. The board continues on to state the current
standstill between the Democrat and Republican party within the Senate in regard to passing a new
supplement at a lower cost. The board then provides their opinion on wage replacement that falls in
between that of the two parties. The only commentary towards the economy is that the failure of the GOP to
replace the supplement by the end of July would start the economic downfall that the politicians are
desperate to avoid.
Logically, this inductive argument does make sense. If the GOP does not enact a new or strong-enough
supplement, it will negatively impact the economy, especially with the growing number of Covid-19 cases.
The GOP was aware that the \$600 supplement was actually more than what many workers made on a
weekly basis however, dramatically decreasing the supplement is not wise because there are still so few
jobs available and completely reopening the economy poses a huge health risk. The strongest part of this
argument was the statement that “The Congressional Budget Office estimates that 5 of every
6 unemployed Americans will be better off receiving benefits than working by the end of 2020, if the \$600
supplement remains in place” (Editorial Board, 2020). The original claim by the board is valid because the
wrong supplement or no supplement will send the economy over a cliff.
Deductive Reasoning
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 47 of 48
“We have limited time and funds to get students and teachers back to school safely, but we can — and
must — do it” (Allen, J.G, Corsi, R., 2020). Schools have been ordered to reopen in the midst of Covid-19.
Allen and Corsi have proposed a method to safely do so, which includes staying home when sick, wearing
masks, air purifiers in classrooms, refreshing ventilation, and temporary classrooms. Their method is
neither logical nor strong because they mention several times that not all schools have the capability to do
this. Some people can be asymptomatic, and others have to other choice but to go to school due to family
dynamics such as poverty. There is a low supply of air purifies in the capacity needed for schools,
companies would collectively need to produce another 1.5 million and that does not include replacements.
Refreshing ventilation means new or improved ventilation systems and that is not something that all
schools have the money for, especially in such a limited time frame. The temporary classrooms mentioned
were tents, which are not feasible because of weather changes. What also weakened this argument was
that the last two paragraphs came off as satire. The article overall seemed to be very sarcastic, as if the
authors intentionally created such a weak argument to show that reopening schools is a terrible idea. Even
with fallacies, the article did not take into consideration changing variables such as the students
themselves. Students can be infected outside of schools and then spread Covid-19 unknowingly. Especially
since schools, especially lower-income schools, tend to be overpopulated and children are generally
unhygienic. This deductive argument was weak overall.
References
Allen, J. G., & Corsi, R. (2020, July 27). Opinion | We can – and must – reopen schools. Here’s how.
Retrieved July 29, 2020, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/07/27/we-can-must-reopenschools-heres-how/
Editorial Board. (2020, July 29). Opinion | By threatening unemployment benefits, Republicans risk sending
the economy over a cliff. Retrieved July 29, 2020, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/bythreatening-unemployment-benefits-republicans-risk-sending-the-economy-over-acliff/2020/07/29/90222852-d1b0-11ea-8c55-61e7fa5e82ab_story.html
7/30/20, 8:14 PM
Page 48 of 48

Economics homework help

Why US?

100% Confidentiality

Information about customers is confidential and never disclosed to third parties.

Timely Delivery

No missed deadlines – 97% of assignments are completed in time.

Original Writing

We complete all papers from scratch. You can get a plagiarism report.

Money Back

If you are convinced that our writer has not followed your requirements, feel free to ask for a refund.