Deductive and Inductive Reasoning (Bacon vs Aristotle - Scientific Revolution)
Vložit
- čas přidán 4. 12. 2015
- In order to understand the Scientific Revolution, it is essential for students to understand the new ways of scientific thinking that surfaced during the 17th century. Deductive reasoning, which uses general premises to arrive at a certain conclusion, has been around since Aristotle. In his book Novum Organum, Sir Francis Bacon advanced a new way of philosophical inquiry known as inductive reasoning, in which the inquirer comes to a probable conclusion based on several specific observations.
While inductive reasoning is typically most closely associated with the scientific method, inductive reasoning has not lost its value. Rene Descartes famous phrase, "Cogito Ergo Sum," is in itself a process of induction.
I present several examples of deductive and inductive reasoning, including Aristotle's classic, "All men are mortal... Socrates is a man... Socrates is mortal." I also explore the so-called "problem of induction" noted by critics such as David Hume. Although induction cannot lead to certain truth, it was never meant to lead to certain truth.
Although I designed this lecture for my AP European History students, it can also be useful for those studying philosophy, communication, logic, and the scientific method.
Man, I did't know that Math Damon was so smart
meth damon
Didn't you see Good Will Hunting
@@bagelstruth9313 The Good Shepherd was by far his best and most intense role. ;D
Meth Demon
lol, Math Damon
Flashback to those times at three am when you didn't understand a word of your Philosophy homework that was worth 50% of your overall grade.
Paris 54 flashback? its very real right now 😭
bro this is me right now lmfaoooo
So true.....omg
Wow, philosophers speak with a Southern Accent, Aristotle is a philosopher so Aristotle speaks with a Southern Accent, and since I speak with a Southern Accent, I'm as smart as Aristotle...Cool!
LOL
lol
Grumbel Bumbel But he did not use inductive reasoning there. He used deductive reasoning but he just used it incorrectly. If he said something like "all southern speakers are as smart as each other, so I am as smart as Aristotle" he would have used deductive reasoning correctly but his conclusion is still wrong since his premises were wrong (i.e philosophers speaking with a southern accent is wrong and that all southern speakers are as smart as each other also wrong),
I don't mean to go too deep into this but I'm just making sure I understand it.
Rob Roy Rigler circular reasoning?
Try again Airistotoh.
The vagaries of the syllogism...
Thank you sir, you are the one who acually knows how to teach.
it is very kind of you. I remain grateful to you. very helpful and understandable.
love from pakistan
+Haider Abbas Glad I can help!
Preparing for exams and watching your videos . Sir, you are truly a gem
“You said bottom” ... scary stuff
Well.... Kids are..
Smells like hes into pizza parties....
"Deductive reasoning has been around a lot longer." Deductive and inductive reasoning have always been around; those specific words may not have been used to describe them, but they have always existed.
Good critique. Been written down and acknowledged a lot longer is a better conclusion. At least according to recorded history (available data points).
Your premise is more sound since it's unlikely that discovery comes quickly after phenomena
Man cannot create laws of reasoning, we can only discover them, similar to the laws of nature ie gravity.
Me thinks this comment is more like debating how many angels can sit on the head of a pin. It really doesn't matter if this reasoning was used before or not, or who first started using them, but rather how each applies to science which is the subject of this video as well as defining each method. The "scientific" was first defined by Bacon and applied to science. How do we know? We have no evidence otherwise. Until you find someone specific who defined inductive thinking and used it for science, not debating the number of angels on the head of pin. :-)
Justin Heubrock I believe he meant , not in terms of existence as such , but as a school of thought . Perhaps that’s what he meant
Aristotele also used inductive. This video is about scientific inductive reasoning, which is different from inductive reasoning.
@@garyking6888 Men do create the laws of reason or more accurately consciousness raised to a particular baseline capacity creates the laws of reason. The world is not reasonable the world is orderly. The distinction is subtle but significant. Reason is the utilization of selective observation formulated into laws to achieve particular ends. There is no such thing as reason without ends and the moment you change the ends the reason can become obsolete, that is, what was once true is no longer true. Newton's physics was true enough for its intended end but inadequate to Einstein's ends. Einstein's physics was true enough for its intended ends but inadequate to quantum mechanics. Science is never completely true it is only an adequate schematization for the ends it seeks to achieve. There is no reason to believe that there isn't indefinite potential inputs either. It seems as though information can be dissected indefinitely meaning no law of reason or at least no accessible law short of the ones consciously creates to achieve an intended end. Fundamentally, reason is a tool not an end. Tools are man made, consciousness made.
Awesome video! I've watched dozens of youtube videos on inductive vs
deductive reasoning and I started to get the sense that deductive
thinkers rely on "facts" having "absolute" or "black/white" qualities to
them.
I tend to use inductive forms of reasoning most of the time, because
there's always a chance that a past "fact" or occurrence isn't going to
happen again tomorrow. Thus, it isn't really a "fact". You nailed it on
the head to suggest that inductive thinkers rely more heavily on
PROBABILITY as defining their interpretations of what "facts" are and
how they could potentially behave. For example, in quantum tunneling, (a
particle could suddenly manifest itself across the universe over
billions of lights years) anything could disappear or manifest itself
from one area to the other side of the universe.
Quantum tunneling is a real phenomenon - it's how stars fuse most of
their various atoms together to create heavier elements...stars aren't
hot enough at their cores to fuse atoms.
So in your example, there's a possibility that the sun may not rise
tomorrow - there's a very tiny possibility that all the particles which
make it up, quantum tunnel to another/other parts of the universe.
Inductive thinkers are going to have problems with formal logic. Inductive thinkers will see formal logic as too rigid and narrow-minded. I had major problems with formal logic when I went to law school...I thought too abstractly and in terms of probability too much - nothing seemed to be a definite fact to me.
I don't think these are inherently related to each method. We can take either form of reasoning as absolute or not, its just that its less reasonable to take induction as truth! And i think that's part of it. Deduction can make claims of prediction but only within certain axiomatic limits and to a degree of probability too!
But regarding Positivism, it actually uses induction to determine truths, at least according to Popper, who stated deduction was superior but couldn't be used to verify truths.
Observation>inductive formulation of premise>deductive preditction derived from premise>experimental observation>inductive 'result' and truh by verification is what Positivism actually does.
man thank you so much. good quick video, give good examples, well spoken. and most of all go to the point with out fluff for the first half.
i know this comment is late, but great job! I wish all teachers could be so informative and explain things in analogies like you do!
Thank you so much Tom. I watched a few other videos from other sources on Induction and it did not clarify it so much as your video. You basically nailed it for me. Thank you for the video. I have philosophy exams in a week and your video was spot on and helped me a lot.
Smartest man with a southern accent i have ever heard.
Absolutely fascinating.
Thank you for an excellent explanation.
And you just saved me from failing a quiz! Thanks from homeschoolers everywhere!
I've read a lot of articles about deductive and inductive method and haven't understood any. This video is the first thing that made me understand these two methods. Thank you for posting this vid. Though I expected further explanation about inductive reasoning, well it was great.
very precise and well-done. Thanks.
Greetings from Belgium! I'm a student in literature and spend my life reading books. I'm saying that in order to ensure you (if you would even need that ^^) that your videos have a good level of accuracy and I rarely find errors in your works on European history, which becomes more and more uncommon on other American channels... Anyway, I'm glad that I can sum up my readings by watching your nice videos with your lovely Southerner accent and, moreover, by doing this, improve my English! :D
If I’d have had a teacher like this I’d have been a history professor. Awesome channel 🤘🏽
Top stuff Mr Richey, your channel is one of my favourites
I could not understand clearly the two concepts prior to watching your video lecture. But now, it's a piece of cake! I am thankful to you Sir for the creative video.
Thank you, Tom, for a most interesting explanation and demonstration of critical thinking skills.
Great summation...making humanity smarter one video at a time.
Wow, thanks. I’m studying college biology and this is the first time this concept was brought up and I was confused on the difference. Your examples really helped. Thanks! Also, I think there for I am is my favorite quote lol.
Thanks for coming through on this track! you are awesome
Brilliantly Done!!!
Splendid!!!
Thanks!
This was smoother than I expected and nicely summed the topic. You also use English in the way i can easily understand what your talkin about. Good job.
This video helped my understanding so much. Thank you Tom!
Clear and great explanation! Thanks!!
Great video Sir! Understandable, clearly spoken, great presentation for some of us students!
I hope I'm not repeating myself, but I have watched this more than once before and find it awesome!! My channel is so Audio-Video, music, etc, but I have always loved these topics! Cheers!
Love your explanation and Southern accent
Makes it so simple and easy to understand
Thanks for your most clear description
You are an amazing Professor! Now, I can apply Borel Cantelli Lemma in these two methods!
Awesome explanation! I'm reading 'The Story of Philosophy' by 'Will Durrant' and I admit I was a bit lost on Francis Bacon, you've really simplified it for me, thankyou!
2:28 THAT SCARED THE CRAP OUTTA ME!
Thanks professor. We could say then , that deductive reasoning is what Aristotle called a : syllogism . You rock
Excellent video, Tom. Thanks so much. Sharing with friends too.
Southern Matt Damon, you are excellent m8, thks for the pre-exam recap!
You're such a great teacher! I like your style!
First time explained that actually made sense!!!
First of all, what an accent, really loved that. Thanks so much for this video, you truly helped me with my math course project!
very good explanation, thanks!
Loved the last line: Question is not who is better? it is just that it's different.
Excellent explanation. Thanks Keep. more coming. Subscribed
Thank for your simple but accurate explanation
I loved your video and I'm excited to share it with fellow students. Chopped full of fun info in a grate format. Thank you. I have subscribed. Tina
Really Good Lesson great thank you for this video and for the knowledge 👍
Excellent presentation and I was so happy to hear your conclusion 8:01 agrees with my thinking, that they are both the tools of science, and should be used alternately or as required for the purpose. I would add to your statement "They are both tools of science" that they are complementary tools of science, they require each other, just as addition and subtraction, multiplication and division, derivative and integral, are all required to operate in both directions.
very well explained! thank you so much!
This was beautifully taught. Thanks so much
Its 3.29 am here.. and I'm watching it to do my home assignment. Thank you
The best explanation on youtube so far Danke schön
Thank you so much for the tutorial.
Very fruitful video. Grateful to u, sir!
So amazing you'd put it so simple for me. Much appreciated.
Glad I can help!
Very well explained. Thanks Sir
I applaud your presentation. It hit the mark for me. Thank you(from a magical thinker)
Great explanation! Thanks for the vid!
very precise,thank you so much
Oh my god thank you so much. I’ve been struggling for days on this and I finally get it!! 10 hours to write my essay🙃
excellent video
Was a very good reference sir.... and you have used a very simple and basic method
Very well explained
Thank you Sir. Good explanation.
Great video! Thank you for posting. I noticed a mistake in the description. As you state in the video, Descartes' famous phrase is a deduction. You referred to induction twice in that sentence when I think you meant to refer to deduction.
Thanks, very brief and to the point..
Hey Tom, Thank you for beautiful explanation. It was really helpful to me.
Fantastic video! I truly enjoyed it.
+briangren Thank you very much!
Thanks for the video. Very helpful
Nice intro... The intro alone got you the sub. +1... And, some great content here... Well done, Sir...
Brilliant video.
that was a excellent way of explaining it.
Thank you! I keep hearing: "Deductive reasoning can't be wrong". Thank you for showing that it can and has to be build on (perhaps well-founded) assumptions.
You know a lot about this topic, You are a great speaker, therefore your video is great! ;)
Lmao. Nicely done
Loved this video thank you!
This was awesome!
Perfect perfect perfect . Thank you
That was very helpful, thank you!
Excellent video!!!!
super helpful for my sociology paper! thanks a bunch
Good video, thanks.
Thank you! Great explanation 😊
Great!!! Reality is not only ideal but empirical too.
Thank you this made sense to me!
This is really cool. I like how you’ve explained my train of thought.... both of them! Lol
Thank you so much for this video. It really helped me in my critical thinking class.
you are the best and you give the best explanation.++++++++++++++++++++++
Its just now I understood. Thanks
Super helpful for my AP Seminar class! Thanks for the video!
Glad to be able to help AP classrooms in such an interdisciplinary fashion!
I'm a fan. You're very good.
Wait a minute - I actually danced after watching this. Yay - assignment, I'm ready for you.
Straight to the point 👍👍
great video tom ..
Nice video Tom. How do you fit abduction into this argument?
Thanx, indeed informative.
Thank you so much, sir
OMG thank so much this lesson helped a lot
Thank you so much, that was very useful.
Thank you very much sir, this helps
You are my favorite chanel