In this essay, I will compare Sir Frances Bacon’s method of inductive reasoning to its counterpart, deductive reasoning presented by Euclid.
Induction is the process of getting the empirical truth which involves the four sources of knowledge; memory, sense perception, introspection, & reason. Induction starts from sense in primary objects. Deduction, on the other hand which is truth based upon rational thought, allows us to use a hypothesis, and examine all possibilities until a logical conclusion can be formed so those things which are true can be classed. In short, the conclusion of inductive reasoning at best can only be probably true whereas the conclusion of deductive reasoning is always necessarily true.
Bacon introduced a new system of “true and perfect” induction which he proposed as both the essential foundation of scientific method and also a necessary tool for the proper interpretation of nature. Bacon although an analytic, designed this new method to differ from the classical methods of induction Aristotle and other philosophers formed. “As Bacon explains it, classic induction proceeds “at once from . . . sense and particulars up to the most general propositions” and then works backward (via deduction) to arrive at intermediate propositions.” (Simpson) One major mistake Bacon noticed with the classic method of induction philosophers such as Aristotle formed was that if general principle proves false, all the intermediate principles could prove false as well. “And, though these affections are necessary as various as are individual conditions, yet the method must be such that the ultimate conclusion of every man shall be the same, or would be the same if inquiry were sufficiently persisted in.” (Peirce) One contradicti...
... middle of paper ...
...ng his own proofs.” (UKEssays)
In conclusion, neither method is better than the other, nor is there a “right” or “wrong” method. We use both methods everyday as we rationally think or wonder about something. We relate our past experiences to new ones which seem to have similarities as past events which is induction. We also, perform experiments and order things according to logic to reach a conclusion which is deduction.
Works Cited
Dobson, Kevin E., and Jon Avery. Ways of Knowing: Selected Readings. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt, 1994. 63-75. Print.
"The Life And Work Of Euclid Philosophy Essay." The Life And Work Of Euclid Philosophy Essay. N.p., n.d. Web. 31 Mar. 2014.
Macphee, Kona. "The Origins of Proof." Plus.maths.org. N.p., 1 Jan. 1999. Web. 31 Mar. 2014.
Simpson, David. "Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy." Bacon, Francis . IEP, n.d. Web. 31 Mar. 2014.
Rowlands, Mark. The Philosopher and the Wolf . New York : Pegasus Publishing , 2008.
ABSTRACT: Indeterminacy theories, such as Wittgenstein's and Kripke's indeterminacy principle on rules and language and Quine's indeterminacy of radical translation, raise some fundamental questions on our knowledge and understanding. In this paper we try to outline and interpret Wittgenstein's and Kripke's indeterminacy, and then compare it to some other related theories on indeterminacy of human thinking, such as raised by Hume, Quine, and Goodman.
The axiomatic method is a process of achieving a scientific theory in which axioms (primitive assumptions) are assumed as the base of the theory, whereas logical values of these axioms find the rest of the theory.
Hobbes and Smart, both well-known and respected philosophers and writers, produce the ultimate examples of good sources. It is in their writing that any scholarly researcher searching for anything philosophical in nature can find a reliable, complete derivation of knowledge. As stated before these publications are relevant to my term paper in a much more involved way than the superficial. It is the underlying beliefs in each one of these philosophers’ viewpoints that provides me with a strong foundation to build my thesis on and subsequently my term paper.
Graham, Daniel W. "Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy." Internet Encylopedia of Philosophy. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Feb. 2014
Surowiecki, James. "Fuel For Thought." New Yorker 83.20 (2007): 25. Academic Search Premier. Web. 21 Nov. 2011
...ernational Journal Of Applied Philosophy 21.1 (2007): 1-24. Academic Search Complete. Web. 4 Feb. 2014.
The problem of induction has a close relation with the inductive reasoning and such expression as “a posteriori”. There are two distinct methods of reasoning: deductive and inductive approaches. A deductive argument is the truth preserving in which if the premises are true than it follows that the conclusion will be true too. The deductive reasoning goes from the general to the specific things. On the other hand, an inductive argument is an argument that may contain true premises and still has a false conclusion. Induction or the inductive reasoning is the form of reasoning in which we make a conclusion about future experience or about presence based on the past experience. The problem of induction also has a connection with the expressions as “a priori” and “a posteriori”. The truth in a priori statement is embedded in the statement itself, and the truth is considered to be as common knowledge or justification without the need to experience. Whereas, in order to determine if a pos...
Nash, Ronald H., (1999). Life‘s ultimate questions: an introduction to philosophy, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49530.
Ed. Michael Goldman. Teaching Philosophy 36.2 (2013): 181-82. Print. The.
Deduction is the third characteristic of rationalism, which is to prove something with certainty rather than reason. For example, Descartes attempted to prove the existence of God through deductive reasoning in his third meditation. It went something like this: “I have an idea of a perfect substance, but I am not a perfect substance, so there is no way I could not be the cause of this idea, so there must be some formal reality which is a perfect substance- like God. Because only perfection can create perfection, and though it can also create imperfection- nothing that is imperfect can create something that is perfect.
3. Gaukroger, Stephen. Francis Bacon and the Transformation of Early Modern Philosophy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2001. Print.
During the enlightenment era, rebellious scholars called philosophers brought new ideas on how to understand and envision the world from different views. Although, each philosopher had their own minds and ideas, they all wanted to improve society in their own unique ways. Two famous influential philosophers are Francis Bacon and John Locke. Locke who is an empiricism, he emphasizes on natural observations. Descartes being a rationalist focus more on innate reasons. However, when analyze the distinguished difference between both Locke and Descartes, it can be views towards the innate idea concepts, the logic proof god’s existence, and the inductive/deductive methods. This can be best demonstrate using the essays, “An Essay Concerning Human Understanding”
The time period surrounding the 17th century was the beginning of an era of great scientific advancement in Europe that was known as the Scientific Revolution. It was during this phase that the use of reason and new advances in science resulted in paradigm shifts. Paradigm shifts are shifts in basic assumptions (paradigms) resulting from the discovery of new information that is no longer compatible with existing paradigms, forcing people to shift their mind frame to adapt to the new assumption ("Thomas S. Kuhn"). In this period, many scientists formulated new theories by developing procedures to test new ideas; one of these procedures was the Ba-conian Method. The creator of the Baconian method, Francis Bacon (1561 – 1626), sought to reform and improve the philosophy of science, and thought that logic should have three goals: to correct habits of mind and intellectual mistakes, to supplement correct intellectual habits and compensate for incorrect ones, and to be constructive in the organization of logic gained (Da-vid). In his attempts to reform science and fulfill these goals, Bacon created a paradigm shift from the use of deductive investigation methods, or basing conclusions on a general law, to the inductive Baconian method that based conclusions on factual evidence from observation or experimentation (Smith). Bacon created this shift firstly by pointing out the flaws in other sys-tems of investigation by strongly criticizing several other philosophical approaches to science. Secondly, Bacon attempted to root out corruption or confusion that he felt was caused by other philosophies by encouraging people to acknowledge and compensate for them. Finally, Bacon created a method to organize and interpret data that would help scien...
Deductive reasoning is general information people have and use to reach to some type of conclusion. Deductive is done by understanding the first part which is using logic to reach a conclusion which reasoning is to understand what is going on. There are many different ways to explain what is required of deductive reasoning. For example, in an article, it states, “logical way of reaching a conclusion based on ded...