Inductive Reasoning and Reasoning by Analogy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63437/3083-6433-2026-1(36)-07Keywords:
inductive reasoning, reasoning by analogy, complete induction, incomplete induction, generalization by simple enumeration, generalization by selection of facts, scientific induction, method of agreement, method of difference, method of concomitant variations, method of residuesAbstract
The article is devoted to two components of logical thinking, namely inductive reasoning and reasoning by analogy. These forms of reasoning play an exceptional role in scientific thinking and scientific activity, especially in the empirical sciences. Such inferences are applicable in the scientific analysis of objects, phenomena, and processes of a natural, technical, and social nature.
The emphasis is placed on the schemes according to which these inferences are constructed. The conditions are identified, the observance of which ensures the plausibility of conclusions drawn on the basis of correct premises. It is noted that inductive reasoning and reasoning by analogy mainly make it possible to obtain plausible knowledge. At the same time, under certain conditions, the use of inductive reasoning makes it possible to draw a reliable conclusion.
As is known, inductive reasoning is divided into complete induction, incomplete induction – including generalization by simple enumeration and generalization by selection of facts – and scientific induction. Each of these types is illustrated with examples from mathematics, natural, technical, and social sciences that correspond to the content of general secondary education.
Special attention is paid to scientific induction, which undoubtedly plays an exceptional role in scientific thinking and scientific activity in clarifying causal relationships between the properties of objects and the features of phenomena and processes. The most common types of scientific induction in experimental studies are the method of agreement, the method of difference, the method of concomitant variations, and the method of residues, which are analyzed and illustrated with examples accessible to high school students.
The article concludes with an analysis of reasoning by analogy and specifies the cases in which this type of reasoning is appropriate.
Downloads
References
Використані літературні джерела
1. Мадзігон В. М., Волощук І. С. Технології дослідження освітніх проблем. Київ: Інститут обдарованої дитини НАПН України, 2018. 370 с.
2. Рундель О. Наукове мислення. Аргументовані способи не приймати все на віру. Київ: Віхола, 2023. 176 с.
3. Гасард Л. Чітке мислення. Мистецтво приймати складні рішення від пілота до стелс-винищувача. Київ: Наш Формат, 2024. 224 с.
4. Млодінов Л. Гнучкість. Пластичне мислення в епоху змін. Київ: КМ-Букс, 2019. 272 с.
References
1. Madzihon, V. M., & Voloshchuk, I. S. (2018). Tekhnolohii doslidzhennia osvitnikh problem [Technologies for researching educational problems]. Kyiv. 370 p. [in Ukrainian].
2. Rundel, O. (2023). Naukove myslennia. Arhumentovani sposoby ne pryimaty vse na viru [Scientific thinking. Reasoned ways not to take everything on faith]. Kyiv. 176 p. [in Ukrainian].
3. Hasard, L. (2024). Chitke myslennia. Mystetstvo pryimaty skladni rishennia vid pilota do stels-vynyshchuvacha [Clear thinking. The art of making difficult decisions from pilot to stealth fighter. Kyiv. 224 p. [in Ukrainian].
4. Mlodinov, L. (2019). Hnuchkist. Plastychne myslennia v epokhu zmin [Elastic. Flexible thinking in a time of change]. Kyiv. 272 p. [in Ukrainian].
