Inductive Reasoning

• Definition: In inductive reasoning, the premises support the conclusion but do not prove it. (There’s always a chance the conclusion could be false.)

---

How Inductive Arguments Can Be Strengthened or Weakened

• Adding more evidence that supports the conclusion strengthens the argument.
• Finding counterexamples or flaws weakens it.
• The strength depends on how similar the sample is to the population being generalized to.

---

Types of Inductive Reasoning

1. Generalization

• Generalization means making a broad claim based on a sample.
• Typically, we move from a sample to predict something about a whole population.

2. Predictive Argument

• Using observations from the past (a sample or pattern) to predict future events.

---

Common Fallacies in Inductive Reasoning

• Hasty Generalization

• Drawing a conclusion from too small a sample.
• Example: Meeting two rude people from a city and concluding that “everyone from that city is rude.”

• Fallacy of Unrepresentative Sample

• The sample is not truly representative of the population.
• Example: Surveying only university students to predict national voting behavior.