Science uses inductive reasoning–not deductive reasoning
FREE Book: “Encyclopedia of Logical Fallacies”
https://realreality.org/download-encyclopedia-of-logical-fallacies/
FREE: 3-Month Transformation homeschool
FREE: 3-Month Transformation
Inductive Reasoning
Science relies on inductive reasoning rather than deductive reasoning. Induction reasons from multiple known facts to a tentative conclusion. Inductive reasoning must also start with truth or the reasoning is unsound. Inductive reasoning never leads to true conclusions. It can lead to convincing guesses. It can be useful for decision-making when you don’t know what to do. Science uses inductive reasoning. Many types of inductive reasoning exist. I’ll quote from Real Faith & Reason Volume One to give an overview of types of inductive reasoning. You’ll see some forms of inductive reasoning are more reliable than others:
Inductive Generalization:
All the people I have known prefer Fords. Therefore, all people prefer Fords.
Statistical Syllogism:
Our historical records show it rains the following day twenty percent of the time whenever we have the current atmospheric conditions. Therefore, we have a 20% chance of rain tomorrow.
Simple Induction:
Twenty-seven years ago, I was a Christian, and I prayed that God would answer my question about why He decided to send the Genesis Flood. Since I didn’t receive an answer I couldn’t argue against, I conclude God doesn’t exist.
Argument from Analogy:
Rats are similar in some ways to humans. We tested our drug on rats and haven’t seen any adverse effects. Therefore, it’s less likely that our drug will have adverse effects on humans.
Causal Inference:
Some people believe natural selection caused some evolutionary changes. They believe other factors caused other evolutionary changes. Therefore, molecules-to-humanity evolution happened.
Argument from Prediction:
If it’s raining outside, I would expect the sidewalk to be wet.The sidewalk is wet.
Therefore, it’s raining outside.
Notice that both of these are fallacies.
Bayesian Inference:
You are testing which of two hypotheses are more probable. You compare the two timelines, the Biblical timeline and the evolutionistic timeline. Assume the Biblical timeline probability is near zero. Assume the evolutionistic timeline probability is near 100%. Feed those two probabilities into your Bayesian formula. Calculate. You infer the evolutionistic timeline is much more probable than the Biblical timeline. You can also reverse the assumptions to come to the opposite conclusion.
Inductive Inference:
Over decades of use, hydroxychloroquine has proven safe if taken in the recommended doses. Several doctors successfully treated hundreds of CCP-virus-infected patients using Hydroxychloroquine, Azithromycin, and zinc. Nations that used Hydroxychloroquine as part of their treatment for the CCP virus have had much less death than nations that haven’t used hydroxychloroquine. Therefore, you can infer that hydroxychloroquine may be an effective treatment for CCP virus. Therefore, you can infer that tens of thousands may have died unnecessarily because of the actions of the deep state, the news media, and the tech giants in suppressing the use of hydroxychloroquine.
Reading through these examples, it’s clear that inductive reasoning isn’t a way to reason to true premises. You can’t rely on inductive reasoning to find facts. If you have true premises and valid form, the conclusion could still be false. That doesn’t mean inductive reasoning isn’t valuable. God provided inductive reasoning. It can help you to survive until you achieve maturity in Christ. If you yield to the Holy Spirit, He will guide your inductive reasoning.
#SonsOfGod #SpiritualTransformation #HearingGodsVoice #Manifestation
