Reference no: EM132293590
Please respond to original forum with a minimum of 250 words with References
Respond to both students with a minimum of 150 word each with References
page 1 original Forum with References
page 2 Thomas response with References
page 3 Claus response with References
Original Forum
Describe and explain what is deductive reasoning and what is inductive reasoning.
Compare and contrast your observations with the material from this week. Do you feel that most research uses deductive reasoning or inductive reasoning?
student Response
Thomas
Well, they say you learn something every day and this week has been no exception within this class. I realized just this week that when I conduct research I use both deductive and inductive reasoning. It's not by mistake but rather necessity, all of which depends on the type of research I am conducting.
As we all know, deductive reasoning goes beyond reasonable doubt and has only one clear answer with nothing to question while inductive reasoning is not as definitive in nature and because of this it basically asks a question or questions. The biggest difference between the two is that inductive reasoning can be used to influence people or persuade the truth to whatever is being researched and just possibly misrepresent the truth. It is our job as researchers to understand this and use our best judgement when drawing conclusions.
Studies have concluded that in doing research cycles of deductive and inductive reasoning will occur because one can move from deductive or theory to inductive or data collection and back again, even though it could be unnoticed (O'Leary, 2007) much like I mentioned that happens to me! There's nothing wrong with this in my view and I think it actually keeps a researcher honest.
Looking at these two methods in terms of which is used more, I really don't know and could not find any real substance to back up the claim for either. What I do know is that it depends on research being conducted, for what audience it is being presented to and what the researcher is after.
Just look at the news, editorials, magazines and websites available to us and sit and think about how many times you have read articles and just knew what you were reading was not factual, without even looking up sources. That's inductive at its finest, information provided that could be the truth, depending on audience.
Tom
O'Leary, Zina. (2007). Deductive/inductive reasoning. The Social Science Jargon-buster. London, UK: Sage UK.
Claus
Deductive reasoning to me is an explanation to something based on common rules or laws, such as 2+3=5 and V=R*I, but also the combination of two or more rules or laws, e.g. (I) William Shakespeare lived from 1564 to 1616, (II) William Shakespeare wrote plays, therefore (III) all plays written by William Shakespeare was written between 1564 and 1616.
Inductive reasoning, on the other hand, is where you for certain cannot use the Latin sentence Quod Erat Demonstrandum. In other words, a situation where one can draw a conclusion based on a certain amount on information and thereby assess it as common practice. Example: Based on ten equally valued statements, where nine says "a" but one say "b", I cannot come to the decisive conclusion of either "a" or "b"; however, I assess that "a" should be the right answer due to argument one, two and three.
Reading the syllabus for this week, especially Nosich's chapter on standards of critical thinking, has verified my opinion that most research uses inductive reasoning due to "how to become more" sentences.
Researchers should strive to be more accurate and more clear in their work in order to get as close to deductive way as possible by using the outcomes mentioned on pp. 160-161.
Could one argue that even a nowadays common rule such as the Pythagorean theorem and the like, was once based on inductive reasoning? Furthermore, would you say that an assessment is equal to the use of inductive reasoning?