Inductive reasoning yields probability while deduction yields certainty
Evidence
Inductive reasoning does not purport to reach truths; its aim is to produce a result that is more probably true than not. Rules of deductive reasoning go further. Properly applied, they present an argument based on the theory that if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1311
Categorization
- DEFINE: Precise definitional contrast between inductive and deductive reasoning — essential terms of art for legal reasoning.
- corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1311
- XREF: connects to: Inductive reasoning from varying factual scenarios forms premises for deductive reasoning — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 762; Legal reasoning yields probability rather than absolute mathematical truths — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 242; Legal reasoning employs both deductive and inductive processes iteratively. — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 312 (+4 more)
Broader Connections
- Legal reasoning yields probability rather than absolute mathematical truths
#exemplifies(0.75) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 242 - Legal reasoning employs both deductive and inductive processes iteratively.
#qualifies(0.60) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 312