BLOG 5

BLOG 5

DEDUCTIVE AND INDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS

Review an accident report, one of our case studies or an article in the popular media. Present……….

·     An example of deductive reasoning (were the conclusions valid or invalid as reasoned?)

·       An example of inductive reasoning (was the argument strong or weak as reasoned?)

THE 9/11 ATTACK ON THE WORLD TRADE CENTRE

DEDUCTIVE REASONING

Premise 1 - If the stairwells and elevators are destroyed or not functioning the occupants of the upper floors of World Trade Centre 1 would not be able to escape.

Premise 2- All stairwells and elevators were destroyed by the impact of the plane and the resulting fires.

Conclusion - Therefore, following the impact of the plane the occupants on the upper floors of World Trade Centre 1 were unable to escape.

This is an example of a deductive argument because

·         the reasoning begins with general premises which lead to a specific conclusion.

·         the reasoning starts with a theory (premise 1), moves to an observation (premise 2), and finishes with the findings (conclusion).

This deductive argument is valid because the conclusion logically follows from the premises.

INDUCTIVE REASONING

The dislodgement of the protective insulation covering the structural beams of the World Trade Centre towers contributed to the collapse of the buildings.

Therefore, the dislodgement of the protective insulation covering the structural beams of other tall buildings may contribute to their collapse.

 This is an example of an inductive argument because

·         The reasoning begins with a specific observation (from past experience) which leads to a general conclusion (for the future).

 

This inductive argument is weak because there is no corroborating evidence. i.e. more cases where the dislodgement of the protective insulation contributed to building collapse.