The Language of Argument

1 8 2

C H A P T E R 8 ■ A r g u m e n t s T o a n d F r o m G e n e r a l i z a t i o n s

and unobserved—past, present, and future) are black? The most obvious way

(though there may be other ways) would be to observe ravens to see whether

they are black or not. This, of course, involves producing an inductive ar-

gument (called a statistical generalization) for the premise of the deductive

argument. Here our confidence in the truth of the premise of the deductive ar-

gument should be no greater than our confidence in the strength of the infer-

ence in the statistical generalization. In this case—and it is not unusual—the

deductive argument provides no stronger grounds in support of its conclu-

sion than does its inductive counterpart, because any reservations we might

have about the strength of the inductive inference will be paralleled by doubts

concerning the truth of the premise of the deductive argument.

We will also avoid the common mistake of saying that deductive arguments

always move from the general to the particular, whereas inductive arguments

always move from the particular to the general. In fact, both sorts of argu-

ments can move in either direction. There are inductive arguments intended to

establish particular matters of fact, and there are deductive arguments that in-

volve generalizations from particulars. For example, when scientists assemble

empirical evidence to determine whether the extinction of the dinosaurs was

caused by the impact of a meteor, their discussions are models of inductive

reasoning. Yet they are not trying to establish a generalization or a scientific

law. Instead, they are trying to determine whether a particular event occurred

some 65 million years ago. Inductive reasoning concerning particular matters

of fact occurs constantly in everyday life as well, for example, when we check

to see whether our television reception is being messed up by someone using

a hair dryer. Deductive arguments from the particular to the general also exist,

though they tend to be trivial, and hence boring. Here’s one:

Benjamin Franklin was the first postmaster general; therefore, anyone who is

identical with Benjamin Franklin was the first postmaster general.

Of course, many deductive arguments do move from the general to the

particular, and many inductive arguments do move from particular premises

to a general conclusion. It is important to remember, however, that this is not

the definitive difference between these two kinds of arguments. What makes

deductive arguments deductive is precisely that they are intended to meet

the deductive standard of validity, and what makes inductive arguments

inductive is just that they are not intended to be deductively valid but are,

instead, intended to be inductively strong.

Assuming a standard context, label each of the following arguments as

deductive or inductive. Explain what it is about the words or form of argument

that indicates whether or not each argument is intended or claimed to be valid.

If it is not clear whether the argument is inductive or deductive, say why.

Exercise I

97364_ch08_ptg01_177-194.indd 182 15/11/13 10:44 AM

some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materiallyCopyright 201^3 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights,

affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.