Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

Inductive/Deductive Reasoning—Standard 5 Logic

Materials:
● Participant handouts (run front to back) of the following:
○ Inductive Reasoning explanation/Example #1 and Writing Conclusions for
sets of evidence
○ Inductive Reasoning Example #2 and Inductive Reasoning Example #3
(these are paragraphs)
○ Deductive Reasoning explanation/Examples and Writing
Conclusions/Identifying faulty reasoning
● Laminated cards of 5 scenarios (analyzing paragraphs for kind of reasoning)

Description:
Inductive and deductive reasoning skills are critical to a student’s ability to evaluate and
analyze persuasive arguments. Since this is a new standard for language arts, our first
goal is for participants to recognize the characteristics of inductive and deductive
reasoning. Then participants will learn to identify and analyze the evidence and
conclusions in both forms of reasoning, analyze which kind of reasoning is being used in
different scenarios, and begin to analyze examples of faulty reasoning and logic.
Inductive Reasoning
1. Pass out Handout #1. Show powerpoint slide of bullet points explaining inductive
reasoning and elaborate as needed. (See more detailed information provided for
presenters.)
2. Show ppt. slide of inductive reasoning example #1 and discuss.
3. Show ppt. slide of Writing Conclusions for Evidence. Lead participants through
two examples as a large group, discussing and formulating conclusions together.
Participants write conclusions on their handouts. Then participants work with
partner to complete the remaining two. Ask participants to share conclusions they
wrote. Discuss any variations in conclusions and determine which is the strongest
conclusion and why.
4. Now we move to paragraphs. Pass out Handout #2. Participants work in small
groups to read Paragraph ex. #2, identify evidence, and formulate conclusion.
Then discuss in large group, writing evidence and conclusion on chart paper or
white board. (Use ppt. slide of paragraph as needed.)
5. Then participants work in small groups to read Ex. 3 (on back of handout),
identify evidence and conclusion. Discuss in large group, writing evidence and
conclusion on chart paper or white board. Next, talk about whether this
conclusion is as sound as the conclusion for Ex. 2. Have participants identify and
discuss the problems with evidence in Ex. 3. (Use ppt. slide for paragraph as
needed.)
 Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

6. Go over Things to Consider When Evaluating an Inductive Argument.

Note: The key provides answers along with important things to point out as these
exercises are discussed.

Deductive Reasoning
1. Pass out Handout #3. Show ppt. slide of bullet points explaining deductive
reasoning and elaborate as needed. (See more detailed information for
presenters.)
2. Show ppt. slide of deductive reasoning examples and useful questions.
3. Show ppt. slide of Writing Conclusions for pairs of statements. Lead participants
through two examples as a large group, discussing and formulating conclusions
together. Then participants work with a partner to complete the remaining three.
Ask participants to share conclusions they wrote. Discuss any variations and
determine the best response to each example.
4. Show ppt. slide of examples of faulty reasoning. As a group, work through each
example to determine why it is not possible to reach a valid conclusion.
5. Next, participants will form groups of 4. Give each group a set of laminated cards
containing paragraphs which demonstrate either inductive or deductive reasoning.
Participants should work together to read/discuss each one and decide the kind of
reasoning each paragraph uses and why. After small groups have come to a
decision about each paragraph, ask for volunteers to share what kind of reasoning
each paragraph demonstrates and why.
6. To close this lesson, take participants back to the Logic Standard to identify the
CLEs, Checks for Understanding, and SPI’s that we have addressed. Point out the
interconnected nature of the CLE’s, Checks, and SPI’s. Note that inductive and
deductive reasoning appear in the checks for understanding at all grade levels.
Ask participants to review all the checks (particularly in 7th and 8th grade
standards) and note that while we did not address all areas of all checks, we did
begin the process of addressing some things, such as quality of evidence and
premises. It might be appropriate to mention that we will develop the logic
standard more thoroughly if we have workshops next summer.

Note: The key provides answers along with important things to point out as these
exercises are discussed.

CONTENT STANDARD 5.0 LOGIC

Grade Level Expectations

 Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

● GLE 0801.5.3 Distinguish between inductive and deductive reasoning.

Check for Understanding
● √ 0801.5.8 Identify and analyze examples of deductive and inductive
reasoning in text.
State Performance Indicators
● SPI 0801.5.6 Identify an example of deductive or inductive reasoning in
text.
Materials needed:
● Handouts of inductive and deductive reasoning information and practice.
● Laminated cards of paragraphs using inductive or deductive reasoning.

Assessment Activity Title: Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

Description of Activity:
1. Distribute the handouts containing inductive and deductive reasoning
explanations and practice.
2. Explain inductive reasoning.
3. Lead students through the examples of Writing Conclusions for inductive
reasoning evidence. Discuss the construction of a strong conclusion.
4. Lead students through identifying the evidence and forming the conclusion
in Example #2 (paragraph). Discuss why this is a sound conclusion.
5. Lead students through identifying the evidence and forming the conclusion
in Example #3 (paragraph). Discuss why this is a weak conclusion.
Discuss the problems with the evidence. Review Things to Consider When
Evaluating an Inductive Argument.
6. Explain deductive reasoning (bullet points in handout).
1. Lead students through writing conclusions for pairs of sentences.
2. Lead students through examples which lead to invalid conclusions.
3. Give students laminated cards of paragraphs using inductive or deductive
reasoning. Students work together in small groups to analyze each
paragraph and determine whether it illustrates inductive or deductive
reasoning and why. Discuss as class.

Assignment Extensions:
Have students create examples of inductive and deductive reasoning.
Students could work as a group to create sets of related sentences which form the
evidence for a sound inductive reasoning conclusion. These could be collected by
the teacher to be typed and distributed for class practice. The next challenge could
be for students to create pairs of sentences containing a major and minor premise
which would lead to a valid conclusion. These could be evaluated by the class to
decide whether a valid conclusion can be drawn or not.
 Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

Inductive Reasoning

● Inductive reasoning begins with a series of specific facts or data (evidence)

and moves to a general statement or conclusion based on the evidence.

● In inductive reasoning, the specific facts or evidence can never absolutely

prove that the conclusion is true. However, the facts/evidence can support the
conclusion.
○ Strong evidence = a conclusion that is sound.
○ Weak evidence = a conclusion that is questionable or perhaps
inaccurate.

● To evaluate the soundness of an inductive argument, identify both the

evidence and the conclusion.
○ Signal words for evidence: since, because,

as shown by

○ Signal words for conclusion: therefore, consequently, in conclusion,

as a result

Inductive Reasoning Example #1

Suppose you took a photograph indoors without a flash on three different

occasions. When you looked at the pictures, you discovered that no pictures
resulted from these shots.
 Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

Evidence:

● Photo A taken indoors without a flash did not come out.

● Photo B taken indoors without a flash did not come out.
● Photo C taken indoors without a flash did not come out.

You could continue to take photos indoors without a flash indefinitely, or you could
form a conclusion based on the evidence you have collected.
Conclusion: Photos taken indoors without a flash will not come out. (The
evidence does not prove that the conclusion is sound. However, it supports
that the conclusion is sound.)

Use inductive reasoning to write a conclusion for each

of the sets of evidence below:

Young children read comic strips.

Teenagers read comic strips.
Adults read comic strips.
Conclusion:___________________________________________

Jim enjoys snow skiing.

Jim enjoys ice-skating.
Jim enjoys bobsledding.
Jim enjoys tobogganing.
Jim enjoys ice hockey.
Conclusion:___________________________________________

Frank is fluent in Spanish.

Frank speaks German like a native.
 Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

Frank reads French newspapers and magazines.

Frank learned Russian in three weeks.
Conclusion:___________________________________________

The beach roads are jammed with traffic every Memorial Day.
The beach roads are jammed with traffic every July 4th.
The beach roads are jammed with traffic every Labor Day.
Conclusion:___________________________________________
Inductive Reasoning Example #2

A wealthy widow with a reputation for being extremely

unpleasant has been found murdered on her estate. According
to the CSI Investigative Team, the killer entered the house
through a very narrow chimney.
Detective Smart, the lead investigator on the case,
suspects that the widow’s butler committed the crime. He
discovers, however, that the butler was one of the few people
that the widow seemed to like. He also learns that since the
widow is dead, the butler will almost certainly lose his job
because the estate is going to be sold to a local art museum.
Additionally, several villagers tell the detective that they and
the butler were enjoying a night out at the local pub at the time
when the murder occurred. Finally, Detective Smart learns
that the butler weighs 275 pounds.

Evidence:
 Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

Conclusion:

Inductive Reasoning Example #3

Community leaders have been trying to drum up support
for the $2.5 billion mass transit bond issue, which will come
before the voters in November. Unfortunately, the election
occurs at a time when most economists agree that the country
is in a deep recession. No matter what benefits the community
leaders claim the transit system will bring the city, experience
has shown that during times of recession, voters almost
invariably defeat measures they consider “excess government
spending.” Inflation and unemployment are the voters’ main
concerns according to a Tribune poll of 300 adults published in
this week’s newspaper. Sixty per cent of those polled said they
were against the bond issue; only twenty per cent supported it,
and another twenty per cent were undecided. It seems likely,
therefore, that the bond issue is doomed.

Evidence:

Conclusion:
 Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

Evaluating an Inductive Argument

Questions to ask about the previous example

1. How many is most economists? 50.6%?

2. How many economists were interviewed? 3 or 3,000?
3. How were the economists interviewed selected? Was a
random selection process used or is there bias?
4. What does almost invariably mean? Exactly what are the
statistics on defeats during recessions?
5. How were the adults polled chosen? Was it a random
sampling?

Things to Consider When Evaluating an Inductive Argument

1. What is the conclusion of the argument?

2. What evidence has been offered to support the
conclusion?
3. How much evidence has been gathered?
4. What is the source of the evidence?
5. Is the conclusion carefully worded to reflect the evidence,
or does it attempt to make a statement for which there is
no adequate evidence?
6. Does the argument contain any fallacies? (more on this
next summer)
 Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

Source: Winterowd, W. Ross, and Patricia Y. Murray. English: Writing and Skills. Orlando:
Coronado Publishers, 1985.

Inductive Reasoning Key

Use inductive reasoning to write a conclusion for each of the sets of evidence below:
Young children read comic strips.
Teenagers read comic strips.
Adults read comic strips.
Conclusion: People of all ages read comic books.

Jim enjoys snow skiing.

Jim enjoys ice-skating.
Jim enjoys bobsledding.
Jim enjoys tobogganing.
Jim enjoys ice hockey.
Conclusion: Jim enjoys many outdoor winter sports.

Frank is fluent in Spanish.

Frank speaks German like a native.
Frank reads French newspapers and magazines.
Frank learned Russian in three weeks.
Conclusion: Frank has acquired multilingual skills easily. Or, Frank seems to learn
foreign languages with relative ease.

The beach roads are jammed with traffic every Memorial Day.
The beach roads are jammed with traffic every July 4th.
 Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

The beach roads are jammed with traffic every Labor Day.
Conclusion: The beach roads are jammed with traffic during summer holidays.

Inductive Reasoning Example #2

A wealthy widow with a reputation for being extremely unpleasant has been
found murdered on her estate. According to the CSI Investigative Team, the killer
entered the house through a very narrow chimney.
Detective Smart, the lead investigator on the case, suspects that the widow’s
butler committed the crime. He discovers, however, that the butler was one of the
few people that the widow seemed to like. He also learns that since the widow is
dead, the butler will almost certainly lose his job because the estate is going to be
sold to a local art museum. Additionally, several villagers tell the detective that they
and the butler were enjoying a night out at the local pub at the time when the
murder occurred. Finally, Detective Smart learns that the butler weighs 275 pounds.

The investigator uses inductive reasoning to eliminate the butler as a suspect. He

gathers the evidence (the specific facts or data) and then bases his conclusion on that
evidence.

Evidence

● Widow seemed to like the butler, so why would he want to kill her.
● The butler will probably lose his job, so he would probably want her to remain
alive.
● He has an alibi—not from just one person, but from several villagers who saw
him at the pub. (To add further evidence, the investigator should interview the
waiters, etc. to confirm his presence at the time of the crime.)
● It seems physically impossible for a 250 pound man to squeeze through a very
narrow chimney.

Conclusion—The butler did not kill the widow.

Remember that this conclusion cannot be proven absolutely. (Although highly

 Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

unlikely, there is the remote possibility that he is guilty and has been able to manipulate
the circumstances so that he appears innocent.) However, there is strong evidence to
support the conclusion that he is innocent. Therefore, the strong evidence leads to a
sound conclusion.

Inductive Reasoning Example #3

Community leaders have been trying to drum up support for the $2.5 billion
mass transit bond issue, which will come before the voters in November.
Unfortunately, the election occurs at a time when most economists agree that the
country is in a deep recession. No matter what benefits the community leaders claim
the transit system will bring the city, experience has shown that during times of
recession, voters almost invariably defeat measures they consider “excess
government spending.” Inflation and unemployment are the voters’ main concerns
according to a Tribune poll of 300 adults published in this week’s newspaper. Sixty
per cent of those polled said they were against the bond issue; only twenty per cent
supported it, and another twenty per cent were undecided. It seems likely,
therefore, that the bond issue is doomed.

Evidence:
● Most economists agree that the country is in a deep recession.
● Voters almost always defeat excess government spending measures in times of
recession.
● According to a Tribune poll of 300 adults, voters’ main concerns are inflation and
unemployment (not a mass transit system).
● Sixty per cent of those polled were against the bond issue; twenty per cent were
for it; twenty-five per cent were undecided.

Conclusion—The bond issue will be defeated.

Evaluating the argument’s evidence and conclusion

This scenario is an example of inductive reasoning because the writer presents a

series of facts/data which lead to a general conclusion based on the evidence. The
conclusion is not a sound conclusion because the evidence offered is not very strong.
Note the generalities and possible problems with the evidence offered:
● How many is most economists? 50.6% would be most...
● How many economists were interviewed? Was the sampling broad enough to
 Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

gather reliable data?

● What process was used to select the economists? Were they randomly selected or
were they selected because they represent a biased perspective?
● What exactly does “almost invariably” mean? Exactly what are the statistics on
defeats of bond issues during recessions? How far back does the data collected
go?
● What are the potential problems with the newspaper poll? Was it a large enough
sampling to render reliable data? How were the adults chosen? Was it a random
sampling or do they represent only a certain age group, gender, education level,
etc.?

As you can see, this argument has many potential problems. Although there may be
strong evidence available that the bond issue will fail, it is not presented in this scenario.
As critical readers and evaluators of text, we must always think carefully about the
evidence offered to support a conclusion. Every reason given in an argument should
be examined critically.

Deductive Reasoning

● Deductive reasoning begins with a general or universal statement and moves

to a specific, more limited statement.
● Syllogism—a form of deductive reasoning made up of three parts: a major
premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion.
● Premise—a general or universal statement which is said to be true.
● Major Premise-- must make a universal statement. This means that it must
be true of all, every, no, or none of the people, objects, or events that are the
subject of the statement. A major premise can never contain a limiter, such
as some, most, or many.
● Minor Premise—fact or truth stated must be related to the major premise.
● For the conclusion of a deductive argument to be true, three conditions must
be met:
○ The major premise must make a universal statement
○ Both of the premises must be true.
○ The argument must be valid (follow the rules of reasoning)
● The key to the credibility of a deductive conclusion lies in the premises.

Deductive Reasoning Examples

Major Premise: All 8th graders must take science.
Minor Premise: John is an 8th grader.
 Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

Conclusion: John must take science.

Major Premise: Frogs are amphibians. (the word all is implied)

Minor Premise: The coqui is a frog native to Puerto Rico.
Conclusion: The coqui is an amphibian.

Minor Premise: Murphy is a dog.

Major Premise: All dogs can bark.
Conclusion: Murphy can bark.

Useful Questions to Evaluate Deductive Arguments

1. What is the conclusion?

2. What are all of the reasons offered to support the conclusion?
3. Are all of the reasons offered to support the conclusion true? (How
can they be checked?)
4. If the reasons are true, must the conclusion necessarily be true? (Does
the argument follow the laws of reasoning? Is there a break in the
logic of the relationship between the major premise and minor
premise?)
5. Does the argument contain any fallacies?

Deductive Reasoning

For each of the following pairs of statements, write the conclusion that follows
logically from the premises. If no valid conclusion is possible, write “No conclusion
possible.”

1. All lawyers must pass a bar exam.

Barbara Smith is a lawyer.

______________________________________________

2. Alan is allergic to all foods containing wheat.

Spaghetti contains wheat.

________________________________________________
 Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

3. Carey’s dog barks only when it is hungry.

Carey’s dog is barking.

_________________________________________________

4. Five to ten per cent of all men are color-blind.

Jerry is a man.

_________________________________________________

5. The ancient Chinese believed that objects carved from jade had supernatural
qualities.

This ancient Chinese deer is carved from jade.

___________________________________________________

Identify the faulty reasoning in each of the examples below and write an explanation
for each error.

1. All snakes are cold-blooded.

All snails are cold-blooded.

All snails are snakes.

2. Some 2002 Fords are blue.

I have a 2002 Ford.

My 2002 Ford is blue.

 Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

3. All Germans have blond hair.

Hans has blond hair.

Hans is a German.

For each of the following situations, decide whether inductive or deductive

reasoning is being used. Be ready to explain your answers.

1. Mrs. Jones is the principal of a middle school which is struggling with high
absenteeism. Before deciding on a plan of action to improve attendance, she
begins by studying the monthly attendance reports. She also examines excuse
notes students have brought. Then she gathers data from teachers and parents
about why students are absent. Finally, she writes a report explaining her
findings and offering suggestions for improving the problem.

2. Jim is an 8th grader at Pleasant Valley Middle School. His class is taking a field
trip tomorrow. Since they will be going to the park after touring the Parthenon,
Jim would like to wear athletic shorts. When he asks his teacher if that would be
alright, she consults the dress code section of the student handbook. She
discovers that it says students are allowed to wear athletic shorts only during
P.E. She then tells Jim that he will not be allowed to wear the athletic shorts on
the field trip.

3. Before the jury goes out to deliberate, the prosecuting attorney summarizes the
evidence he has presented in court against a person accused of robbing the local
McDonald’s. He concludes his argument by saying that the evidence makes it
clear that the person is guilty of the crime.

4. One of Sarah’s friends told her that a policeman has been using his radar gun to
catch speeders in an area along Highway 96 where the speed limit has just been
lowered from 55 to 40. That afternoon as she approaches that particular
 Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

location, she slows down in order to avoid getting a speeding ticket.

5. A science teacher assigns the following homework: at 9 p.m. every night for two
months, see which constellations are visible in the eastern sky. Report your
findings to the class.

Source: Winterowd, W. Ross, and Patricia Y. Murray. English: Writing and Skills. Orlando:
Coronado Publishers, 1985.

Deductive Reasoning Key

Major Premise: All 8th graders must take science. (Note: major premise is a universal
statement—All)
Minor Premise: John is an 8th grader. (Minor premise is logically related to the major
premise.)
Conclusion: John must take science. (Conclusion is valid/true because the premises are
true and the argument follows the rules of reasoning.)

Major Premise: Frogs are amphibians. (The word all is implied, which qualifies it as a
universal statement.)
Minor Premise: The coqui is a frog native to Puerto Rico. (Minor premise flows
logically from major premise. Note that the information native to this region is not
relevant to the reasoning, but neither does it interfere with the reasoning. Students must
learn to identify the essential information and weed out extra.)
Conclusion: The coqui is an amphibian. (Conclusion is valid.)

Minor Premise: Murphy is a dog.

Major Premise: All dogs can bark.
Conclusion: Murphy can bark.

(Note that the example above is atypical because the minor premise appears before the
major premise. Students must learn to distinguish between the major and minor premises,
reorganize them if necessary, and then evaluate the validity of the argument. If we accept
 Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

that the major premise is true, then the minor premise bears a logical relationship to the
major premise, and the conclusion, therefore, is valid.)

Useful Questions to Evaluate Deductive Arguments

1. What is the conclusion?

2. What are all of the reasons offered to support the conclusion?
3. Are all of the reasons offered to support the conclusion true? (How can
they be checked?)
4. If the reasons are true, must the conclusion necessarily be true? (Does the
argument follow the laws of reasoning? Is there a break in the logic of the
relationship between the major premise and minor premise?)
5. Does the argument contain any fallacies?

Deductive Reasoning Key

For each of the following pairs of statements, write the conclusion that follows logically
from the premises. If no valid conclusion is possible, write “No conclusion possible.”

1. All lawyers must pass a bar exam.

Barbara Smith is a lawyer.

Conclusion: Barbara Smith passed the bar exam.

2. Alan is allergic to all foods containing wheat.

Spaghetti contains wheat.

Conclusion: Alan is allergic to spaghetti.

3. Carey’s dog barks only when it is hungry.

 Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

Carey’s dog is barking.

Conclusion: Carey’s dog is hungry.

All of the above examples contain a major premise which is a universal

statement and a minor premise which bears a logical connection to the major
premise. If we accept that the premises are true, then the arguments are
valid. Remember that the key to the credibility of a deductive argument lies
in the truth of the premises, so it is important to use reliable sources to verify
the premises.

4. Five to ten per cent of all men are color-blind.

Jerry is a man.

No valid conclusion can be drawn because the major premise contains a

limiter (five to ten per cent). The argument is not valid because we do not
know whether Jerry falls within the small percentage of color-blind men. So,
the argument falls apart.

5. The ancient Chinese believed that objects carved from jade had supernatural
qualities.

This ancient Chinese deer is carved from jade.

Valid Conclusion: The ancient Chinese believed that this ancient Chinese
deer had supernatural qualities.

Invalid Conclusion: This ancient Chinese deer had supernatural qualities.

Note that this conclusion must include ancient Chinese believed because odds
are that we would not accept that this deer had supernatural qualities.
 Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

Deductive Reasoning Key

Identify the faulty reasoning in each of the examples below and write an
explanation for each error.

1. All snakes are cold-blooded.

All snails are cold-blooded.

All snails are snakes.

There is a break in the logic from the major premise to the minor
premise. While both premises are true, they do not lead to a valid
conclusion.

The minor premise behaves more like a major premise (essentially

creating two hypotheses). As a result, there is no real minor premise
which flows from the major premise. This results in an invalid
conclusion.

2. Some 2002 Fords are blue.

I have a 2002 Ford.

My 2002 Ford is blue.

The major premise contains the limiter some, which automatically leads
to an invalid conclusion.

3. All Germans have blond hair.

 Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

Hans has blond hair.

Hans is a German.

While this syllogism presents a valid argument, it illustrates the

importance of testing the validity/truth of the premises. If either premise
is untrue, then the conclusion is not valid. We know that the major
premise is not true. Remember—the key to the credibility of a deductive
conclusion lies in the premises.

For each of the following situations, decide whether inductive or deductive reasoning is
being used. Be ready to explain your answers.

1. Mrs. Jones is the principal of a middle school which is struggling with high
absenteeism. Before deciding on a plan of action to improve attendance, she begins
by studying the monthly attendance reports. She also examines excuse notes students
have brought. Then she gathers data from teachers and parents about why students
are absent. Finally, she writes a report explaining her findings and offering
suggestions for improving the problem.

This is an example of inductive reasoning. Notice that Mrs. Jones is gathering facts
and data (monthly attendance reports, excuse notes, parent and teacher feedback
and data) before she writes the report, so she is going from the specific pieces of
information to the general conclusion.

2. Jim is an 8th grader at Pleasant Valley Middle School. His class is taking a field trip
tomorrow. Since they will be going to the park after touring the Parthenon, Jim
would like to wear athletic shorts. When he asks his teacher if that would be alright,
she consults the dress code section of the student handbook. She discovers that it says
 Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

students are allowed to wear athletic shorts only during P.E. She then tells Jim that
he will not be allowed to wear the athletic shorts on the field trip.

This is an example of deductive reasoning because the teacher consults the student
handbook (the overarching guide for dress code) before arriving at a conclusion
regarding whether or not Jim will be allowed to wear athletic shorts on the field
trip. She is moving from the general/universal statement to the specific, more
limited statement.

3. Before the jury goes out to deliberate, the prosecuting attorney summarizes the
evidence he has presented in court against a person accused of robbing the local
McDonald’s. He concludes his argument by saying that the evidence makes it clear
that the person is guilty of the crime.

This is an example of inductive reasoning because the attorney presents all the
pieces of evidence (the specific facts/data) to lead to the general
statement/conclusion that his client is not guilty.

4. One of Sarah’s friends told her that a policeman has been using his radar gun to catch
speeders in an area along Highway 96 where the speed limit has just been lowered
from 55 to 40. That afternoon as she approaches that particular location, she slows
down in order to avoid getting a speeding ticket.

This is an example of deductive reasoning because Sarah accepts the major premise
that the policeman will be checking speeds when she passes by and adjusts her
behavior (slowing down) according to that premise. She is moving from the general
to the specific instance.

5. A science teacher assigns the following homework: at 9 p.m. every night for two
months, see which constellations are visible in the eastern sky. Report your findings
to the class.

This is inductive reasoning because the student gathers data before reporting to the
class. He is moving from the specifics to the general.