Hypertext

Look up deductive reasoning in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Deductive reasoning, also called deductive logic, is the process of reasoning from one or more general statements regarding what is known to reach a logically certain conclusion. Deductive reasoning involves using given true premises to reach a conclusion that is also true. Deductive reasoning contrasts with inductive reasoning in that a specific conclusion is arrived at from a general principle. If the rules and logic of deduction are followed, this procedure ensures an accurate conclusion.

An example of a deductive argument:

1. All men are mortal.
2. Socrates is a man.
3. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.

The first premise states that all objects classified as "men" have the attribute "mortal". The second premise states that "Socrates" is classified as a "man" – a member of the set "men". The conclusion then states that "Socrates" must be "mortal" because he inherits this attribute from his classification as a "man".

Deductive reasoning moves from theory to observations or findings. So, in the above example, the theory is that "all men are mortal" and the observation is that "Socrates is a man". So, the conclusion can be made that "Socrates is mortal".

Contents 1 Law of Detachment 2 Law of Syllogism 3 Deductive Logic: Validity and Soundness 4 Hume's Skepticism 5 Deductive reasoning and Education 6 See also 7 References 8 Further reading

Law of Detachment

The law of detachment is the first form of deductive reasoning. A single conditional statement is made, and a hypothesis (P) is stated. The conclusion (Q) is then deduced from the statement and the hypothesis. The most basic form is listed below:

1. P→Q (conditional statement)
2. P (hypothesis stated)
3. Q (conclusion deduced)

In deductive reasoning, we can conclude Q from P by using the law of detachment. However, if the conclusion (Q) is given instead of the hypothesis (P) then there is no valid conclusion.

The following is an example of an argument using the law of detachment in the form of an if-then statement:

1. If an angle A>90°, then A is an obtuse angle.
2. A=120°
3. A is an obtuse angle.

Since the measurement of angle A is greater than 90°, we can deduce that A is an obtuse angle.

Law of Syllogism

The law of syllogism takes two conditional statements and forms a conclusion by combining the hypothesis of one statement with the conclusion of another. Here is the general form, with the true premise P:

1. P→Q
2. Q→R
3. Therefore, P→R.

The following is an example:

1. If Larry is sick, then he will be absent from school.
2. If Larry is absent, then he will miss his classwork.
3. If Larry is sick, then he will miss his classwork.

We deduced the final statement by combining the hypothesis of the first statement with the conclusion of the second statement. We also conclude that this could be a false statement.

Deductive Logic: Validity and Soundness

Deductive arguments are evaluated in terms of their validity and soundness. It is possible to have a deductive argument that is logically valid but is not sound.

An argument is valid if it is impossible for its premises to be true while its conclusion is false. In other words, the conclusion must be true if the premises, whatever they may be, are true. An argument can be valid even though the premises are false.

An argument is sound if it is valid and the premises are true.

The following is an example of an argument that is valid, but not sound:

1. Everyone who eats steak is a quarterback.
2. John eats steak.
3. Therefore, John is a quarterback.

The example's first premise is false – there are people who eat steak and are not quarterbacks – but the conclusion must be true, so long as the premises are true (i.e. it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false). Therefore the argument is valid, but not sound.

In this example, the first statement uses categorical reasoning, saying that all steak-eaters are definitely quarterbacks. This theory of deductive reasoning – also known as term logic – was developed by Aristotle, but was superseded by propositional (sentential) logic and predicate logic.

Deductive reasoning can be contrasted with inductive reasoning, in regards to validity and soundness. In cases of inductive reasoning, even though the premises are true and the argument is "valid", it is possible for the conclusion to be false (determined to be false with a counterexample or other means).

Hume's Skepticism

Philosopher David Hume presented grounds to doubt deduction by questioning induction. Hume's problem of induction starts by suggesting that the use of even the simplest forms of induction simply cannot be justified by inductive reasoning itself. Moreover, induction cannot be justified by deduction either. Therefore, induction cannot be justified rationally. Consequently, if induction is not yet justified, then deduction seems to be left to rationally justify itself – an objectionable conclusion to Hume.

Deductive reasoning and Education

Deductive reasoning is generally thought of as a skill that develops without any formal teaching or training. As a result of this belief, deductive skills are not taught in secondary schools, where students are expected to use reasoning more often and at a higher level. For example, students have an abrupt introduction to mathematical proofs – which heavily relies on deductive reasoning – in high school.

See also

Argument (logic) Logic Mathematical logic Abductive reasoning Analogical reasoning Closed world assumption Correspondence theory of truth Defeasible reasoning Decision making Decision theory Fallacy Geometry Hypothetico-deductive method

Logic portal Inquiry Inductive reasoning Inference Logical consequence Natural deduction Propositional calculus Retroductive reasoning Scientific method Soundness Syllogism

References

Further reading

• Vincent F. Hendricks, Thought 2 Talk: A Crash Course in Reflection and Expression, New York: Automatic Press / VIP, 2005, ISBN 87-991013-7-8
• Philip Johnson-Laird, Ruth M. J. Byrne, Deduction, Psychology Press 1991, ISBN 978-0-86377-149-1jiii
• Zarefsky, David, Argumentation: The Study of Effective Reasoning Parts I and II, The Teaching Company 2002

v t e Philosophy Branches Metaphysics Epistemology Logic Ethics Aesthetics Philosophy of Action Art Being Biology Business Chemistry Computer science Culture Design Dialogue Education Economics Engineering Environment Film Futility Geography Information Healthcare History Human nature Humor Language Law Literature Mathematics Mind Music Pain Philosophy Physics Politics Psychology Religion Hermeneutics Science Sexuality Social science Technology War Schools of thought By historical era Ancient Western Medieval Renaissance Modern Contemporary Ancient Chinese Agriculturalism Confucianism Legalism Logicians Mohism Chinese naturalism Neotaoism Taoism Yangism Zen Greco-Roman Aristotelianism Cynicism Epicureanism Neoplatonism Peripatetic Platonism Presocratic Pythagoreanism Sophism Stoicism Indian Buddhist Cārvāka Hindu Jain Persian Mazdakism Zoroastrianism Zurvanism 9th–16th centuries Christian Europe Scholasticism Renaissance humanism Thomism East Asian Korean Confucianism Rigaku Neo-Confucianism Islamic Averroism Avicennism Persian Illuminationism Kalam Sufi Jewish Judeo-Islamic 17th–21st centuries Absolute idealism Analytic philosophy Anarchism Behaviorism Cartesianism Classical liberalism Deconstruction Dialectical materialism Eliminativism Epiphenomenalism Egoism Existentialism Feminist Frankfurt School Functionalism Hegelianism Kantianism Kokugaku Kyoto school Legal positivism Logical positivism Marxism Modernism Neo-Kantianism Neo-Thomism New Confucianism Ordinary language Phenomenology Postmodernism Post-structuralism Pragmatism Reformed epistemology Structuralism Transcendentalism Utilitarianism Vienna Circle more... Positions Certainty Skepticism Solipsism Nihilism Ethics Consequentialism Deontology Virtue Free will Compatibilism Determinism Libertarianism Metaphysics Atomism Dualism Monism Naturalism Epistemology Constructivism Empiricism Idealism Particularism Rationalism Naturalism Normativity Absolutism Particularism Relativism Universalism Ontology Action Event Process Reality Anti-realism Conceptualism Idealism Materialism Nominalism Realism By region African American Aztec British Chinese Danish French German Greek Indian Indonesian Iranian Italian Japanese Korean Polish Romanian Russian Lists Outline Index Schools Glossary Philosophers Movements Publications Portal Category WikiProject changes

v t e Logic   Overview Academic areas Argumentation theory Axiology Critical thinking Computability theory Formal semantics History of logic Informal logic Logic in computer science Mathematical logic Mathematics Metalogic Metamathematics Model theory Philosophical logic Philosophy Philosophy of logic Philosophy of mathematics Proof theory Set theory Foundational concepts Abduction Analytic truth Antinomy A priori Deduction Definition Description Entailment Induction Inference Logical consequence Logical form Logical implication Logical truth Name Necessity Meaning Paradox Possible world Presupposition Probability Reason Reasoning Reference Semantics Statement Strict implication Substitution Syntax Truth Truth value Validity   Philosophical logic Critical thinking and Informal logic Analysis Ambiguity Argument Belief Bias Credibility Evidence Explanation Explanatory power Fact Fallacy Inquiry Opinion Parsimony Premise Propaganda Prudence Reasoning Relevance Rhetoric Rigor Vagueness Theories of deduction Constructivism Dialetheism Fictionalism Finitism Formalism Intuitionism Logical atomism Logicism Nominalism Platonic realism Pragmatism Realism   Metalogic and metamathematics Cantor's theorem Church's theorem Church's thesis Consistency Effective method Foundations of mathematics Gödel's completeness theorem Gödel's incompleteness theorems Soundness Completeness Decidability Interpretation Löwenheim–Skolem theorem Metatheorem Satisfiability Independence Type–token distinction Use–mention distinction   Mathematical logic General Formal language Formation rule Formal system Deductive system Formal proof Formal semantics Well-formed formula Set Element Class Classical logic Axiom Natural deduction Rule of inference Relation Theorem Logical consequence Axiomatic system Type theory Symbol Syntax Theory Traditional logic Proposition Inference Argument Validity Cogency Syllogism Square of opposition Venn diagram Propositional calculus and Boolean logic Boolean functions Propositional calculus Propositional formula Logical connectives Truth tables Predicate First-order Quantifiers Predicate Second-order Monadic predicate calculus Set theory Set Empty set Enumeration Extensionality Finite set Function Subset Power set Countable set Recursive set Domain Range Ordered pair Uncountable set Model theory Model Interpretation Non-standard model Finite model theory Truth value Validity Proof theory Formal proof Deductive system Formal system Theorem Logical consequence Rule of inference Syntax Computability theory Recursion Recursive set Recursively enumerable set Decision problem Church–Turing thesis Computable function Primitive recursive function   Non-classical logic Modal logic Alethic Axiologic Deontic Doxastic Epistemic Temporal Intuitionism Intuitionistic logic Constructive analysis Heyting arithmetic Intuitionistic type theory Constructive set theory Fuzzy logic Degree of truth Fuzzy rule Fuzzy set Fuzzy finite element Fuzzy set operations Substructural logic Structural rule Relevance logic Linear logic Paraconsistent logic Dialetheism Description logic Ontology Ontology language   Logicians Anderson Aristotle Averroes Avicenna Bain Barwise Bernays Boole Boolos Cantor Carnap Church Chrysippus Curry De Morgan Frege Geach Gentzen Gödel Hilbert Kleene Kripke Leibniz Löwenheim Peano Peirce Putnam Quine Russell Schröder Scotus Skolem Smullyan Tarski Turing Whitehead William of Ockham Wittgenstein Zermelo   Lists Topics Outline of logic Index of logic articles Mathematical logic Boolean algebra Set theory Other Logicians Rules of inference Paradoxes Fallacies Logic symbols Portal Category Outline WikiProject Talk changes