Deductive vs. Inductive Reasoning

Deductive vs. Inductive

The author of this report is given a test case example of a sociologist that is conducting research. The author is being asked to discern whether the sociologist in question is engaging in deductive reasoning or if the sociologists is instead using an inductive approach. The author of this report will first define and quantify what each of those terms means along with examples of each. The author will then summarize the test case that was offered and clearly define which method the sociologist is using. While the two methods of research are similar in some ways, the way in which they start and finish is clearly different.

As defined by Alina Bradford on the Live Science website, there is a clear difference between the two types of reasoning. Bradford explains that deductive reason is a "basic form of valid reasoning." She explains that deductive reasoning, also commonly referred to as deduction, starts out with a general statement. This general statement typically comes in the form of a hypothesis or theory about what results will be potentially gleaned from an experiment or observation. The hypothesis may or may not be correct. As such, the person who poses the theory will either engage in general observations of the subject of study and/or will conduct an experiment that is designed to answer the question or hypothesis one way or another. Bradford uses the example of posing a theory that all men are mortal. Further, this person would center on man in particular. The scientists would then assert that this man is mortal. Since men are indeed mortal, the theory would be correct (Bradford, 2015).

With inductive reasoning, the approach is a little different. Rather than having a preconceived theory or idea about what is going to be observed and/or what is going to happen, the person in question just goes into observation mode and then reacts and analyzes based on what is noticed and seen. For example, let us use the example of a sociologist that goes to the mall to see how men and/or women react with their children, if they have any. For example, the sociologist might wish to observe whether the women lead or carry the child or if the man would do so. Unless the sociologist is posing theories or hypotheses about what he will see in advance of doing so, he is engaging in inductive reasoning. If, however, he were to guess that women would be more often the caretakers of the children rather than the men, he would be engaging in deductive reasoning (Crossman, 2015). In the case of the test case given for this assignment, it is specifically noted that the sociologist observes the working habits of welfare recipients. It is also noted that he poses a theory about the behaviors of the group only after engaging in weeks of research and study. Given that there is absolutely no mentioned of any preconceived notions, theories or hypotheses, this is a clear case of inductive reasoning as the theories offered come after the research rather than before.