Critical Thinking Chapter 7

INDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS
The aim of this tutorial is to help you learn to

recognize, analyze, and evaluate inductive
arguments.
Inductive arguments
2
Inductive arguments claim that their conclusion probably

follows from the premises. As a result, inductive
arguments are either stronger or weaker, rather than
either true or false.
Certain words and phrases are commonly used in
inductive arguments; these include probably, most likely,
chances are, it is reasonable to suppose, we can expect,
and it seems probable that. However, not all inductive
arguments contain indicator words.
2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Most Corgis make good watchdogs.

My dog Mindy is a Corgi. Therefore,
Mindy is probably a good watchdog.
Three types of inductive arguments

4
There are three common types of inductive arguments:
Generalizations
Analogies
Causal arguments
Generalizations
5
We use generalization when we draw a conclusion

about a certain characteristic of a group or population
based on a sample from that group.
Certain data collection processes employ inductive

generalization. These include polls, surveys, and
sampling techniques. Types of sampling techniques
include representative samples, random samples, and
self-selected samples.
Hot or Not?
6
Have you ever made a

generalization in your life that you
later found to be false?
Problems with generalizations

7
Although data collected using inductive generalization

techniques may be useful and credible, it is also
susceptible to problems.
These problems include:
Bias in wording, such as slanted questions, push polls, and

loaded questions.
Evaluating polls or surveys

8
When evaluating poll or survey data, it is important to

ask questions to determine the datas worth and
accuracy.
Who conducted the poll and what was its purpose?

How was the sample selected? Was it large enough?
Was the sample representative of the study group?
What method was used to carry out the poll?
What questions were asked? Were they unbiased?
What other polls have been taken on this issue? Is this poll
consistent with their findings?
Your participation in a poll helps to provide

an accurate portrayal of a specific group or
a population at large.
10
Internet polls and some polls sponsored by television

programs or stations, such as American Idol or CNN,
may be biased or unrepresentative, since they rely on
call-ins from their viewers or subscribers.
11
George Gallup
12
Comparative table of heights of U.S. presidential

candidates
Evaluating inductive arguments using

generalization
13
When evaluating generalization-based arguments, the

following five criteria are useful:
Check whether the premises are true.

Decide if the sample is large enough.
Decide if the sample is representative.
Decide if the sample is current and up-to-date.
Determine whether the premises support the conclusion.
14
Women serving combat duty in the United States military has been an issue of contention
but are we against (or for) it for the right reasons?
Analogies
15
An analogy is based on a comparison between two or

more things or events. Metaphors, a type of descriptive
analogy, are common in literature. Analogies can be
used on their own or as premises in arguments.
Arguments using analogies are common in personal
relationships, as well as in many fields such as law,
religion, politics, business, science, and the military.
The success of an argument using an analogy depends

on the type and extent of relevant similarities and
dissimilarities between the things being compared.
16
An alliance of tribes, Tecumseh argued, is like braided hair. A single strand of hair is easy to
break. But several strands braided together are almost impossible to break.
Evaluating arguments based on

analogy
17
Knowing how to evaluate arguments using analogy is a

valuable critical thinking skill.
The following strategies are useful:
Identify what is being compared.

List the similarities.
List the dissimilarities.
Compare the lists.
Examine possible counter-analogies.
Determine if the analogy supports the conclusion.
18
The argument from design states that God must exist because the world displays
purposefulness.
19
I do [say what I mean], Alice

hastily replied; at leastat least
I mean what I saythats the
same thing, you know.
Not the same thing a bit! said
the Hatter. Why, you might just
as well say that I see what I eat
is the same thing as I eat what I
see!
You might just as well say,
added the March Hare, That
I like what I get is the same
thing as I get what I like!
You might just as well say,
added the Dormouse, which
seemed to be talking in its sleep,
That I breathe when
I sleep is the same thing as
I sleep when I breathe!
20
Your Brain on Drugs

21
The claim that AI are not conscious and lack feeling because they are not organic
is based on an irrelevant dissimilarity.
Causal arguments
22
A cause is an event that brings about a change or

effect. In causal arguments, something is claimed as
the cause of something else. Understanding cause and
effect relations is a crucial component of effective critical
thinking.
23
Serial killer Ted Bundy blamed pornography for his

crimes.
24
Antonia Novello
Correlations
25
When two events occur together at rates higher than

probability, the relationship is called a correlation. If the
incidence of one event increases when the second one
increases, the relationship is called a positive
correlation. A negative correlation occurs when the
occurrence of one event increases as the other
increases.
26
The correlation between cigarettes smoked and lung cancer
Evaluating causal arguments

27
Knowing how to evaluate causal arguments makes it

easier for you to employ them productively.
Use the following four criteria:
Determine whether the evidence for a causal relationship is

strong.
Make sure the argument is free of fallacies.
Decide whether the data is current and up-to-date.
Make sure the conclusion does not go beyond the premises.
28
When making decisions on the basis of causal arguments,

such as whether to allow your children to sit close to a
television, your information should be up-to-date. What
was true at one time may no longer be the case.
Conclusions
29
Knowledge of inductive arguments, including

generalizations, analogies, and causal arguments, is
essential for us to effectively function in the world. As good
critical thinkers, we must constantly identify and evaluate
these types of arguments, both our own and those
presented to us by others.
30
Perspectives on legalizing marijuana


Critical Thinking Chapter 7

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Critical Thinking Chapter 7

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Critical Thinking Chapter 7

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS

The aim of this tutorial is to help you learn to

Inductive arguments claim that their conclusion probably

2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Most Corgis make good watchdogs.

2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Three types of inductive arguments

There are three common types of inductive arguments:

2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

We use generalization when we draw a conclusion

Certain data collection processes employ inductive

2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Have you ever made a

2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Problems with generalizations

Although data collected using inductive generalization

These problems include:

Bias in wording, such as slanted questions, push polls, and

2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Evaluating polls or surveys

When evaluating poll or survey data, it is important to

Who conducted the poll and what was its purpose?

Your participation in a poll helps to provide

2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Internet polls and some polls sponsored by television

Comparative table of heights of U.S. presidential

2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Evaluating inductive arguments using

When evaluating generalization-based arguments, the

Check whether the premises are true.

2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

An analogy is based on a comparison between two or

The success of an argument using an analogy depends

2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Evaluating arguments based on

Knowing how to evaluate arguments using analogy is a

The following strategies are useful:

Identify what is being compared.

2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

I do [say what I mean], Alice

Your Brain on Drugs

2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

A cause is an event that brings about a change or

2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Serial killer Ted Bundy blamed pornography for his

2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

When two events occur together at rates higher than

2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

The correlation between cigarettes smoked and lung cancer

2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Evaluating causal arguments

Knowing how to evaluate causal arguments makes it

Use the following four criteria:

Determine whether the evidence for a causal relationship is

2012, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

When making decisions on the basis of causal arguments,

Knowledge of inductive arguments, including