The Use of Deductive Reasoning in Science

The act of  reasoning that starts with a given set premises and draws a conclusion is called deductive reasoning.

Deductive reasoning begins with general concepts and principles and draws specific conclusion by starting with a given set premises and draws conclusions from them. The conclusions made by way of deductive reasoning are only as valid as the premises on which they are based such that only one false premise can produce a false conclusion. A valid deductive argument t is one where its truth necessarily follows from the starting premises. A sound deductive argument is one that is valid and all of its premises are true other wise it is considered unsound.

A common form of deductive reasoning is called a syllogism It has three parts.  The first part is a set of general characteristics belonging to a category of objects. The second shows that the object under discussion belongs to that category The conclusion that the object under discussion has that general characteristic.

Deductive reasoning dependents entirely on the validity of premises being used. The premises used may be facts derived from observation or a totally philosophical assumption.

Deductive reasoning is a very useful tool of reasoning however it does have its difficulties. It depends heavily on the accuracy its starting premises. However flawed premises result in flawed conclusions. These difficulties need to be properly understood to properly understand scientific statements including those of both Creationists and Evolutionists.

Observation and the Viewing and Recording of. Data

The process of viewing and recording events is called observation. Viewing and recording mainly consist of watching a phenomenon and recording the observation.

The accuracy of observations are limited because real world observations some times miss stuff. An important event may occur when observations are not being mad or outside the range of the observer’s sight. As a result observations can be some what subjective since it is too easy for an observer to see what he wants to see because the observer is looking for what he wants to see So patterns resembling what the observer wants to see are more likely noticed. It is also too easy for an observer to not see what he does not want to see because the observer is not looking for what he does not want to see and patterns not resembling what the observer is not looking for can be over looked. Knowing of such problems helps avoid them.

As important as Observation  is in science it does have its limitations and pitfalls. Being aware of those limitations helps one to avoid them.

The Major Tool of Science, that of Measurements

The process of obtaining numerical values representing physical properties is called measurement. These properties include such things as length, mass, or time, by way of a unit of measurement. A unit of measurement is a magnitude representing a physical quantity by use of a standard for measurement of that physical quantity. A measuring device is a piece of equipment used to measure a physical quantity based on a standard for measurement.

 Measurement and Objectivity

Measurement is the most objective part of science since the resulting numbers are what they are. Using mechanical devices for measurement improves objectivity by removing human subjectivity. The validity of a measurement is only as valid as the theory behind it.

A Description of Logical Fallacies

A Logical Fallacy is an error within a logical argument that is a flaw in the argument’s structure that is said to invalidate the argument. A logical fallacy is independent of the truth so a fallacy does not necessarily invalidate the argument's premises and conclusions. However arguments derived from logical fallacies often do lead to an incorrect conclusion due to faulty reasoning.

Examples

Ad hominem
Latin: “To the Man”
It is an argument that attacks people holding a particular point of view rather than attacking the point of view itself. A good example is the case where an opponent starts insulting you in some manner rather than countering your argument.

Overgeneralization
It is an argument which makes a statement so broad as to exceed the original point that was trying to be proved. Often it involves taking a small sample and generalizing it to the whole group.

Non sequitur
Latin: "It does not follow"
It is an argument which moves from a premise to a conclusion where no connection exists between the two.

Proof by authority
It is an argument which is based on a person's authority, rather than on the merits of the authority's position. A good example is a argument is assumed correct because it comes from a person with a PHD.

Proof by assertion

It is an argument which simply states something as true without evidence or argument to support it.

Circular reasoning
It is an argument that tries to prove something by first asserting it and then trying to "prove" it.

Straw man
It is an argument where a person argues against a position similar to but weaker than their opponent’s real position.

Manufacturing facts from a theory

It is an undemonstrated or unobserved idea that is stated as fact because it agrees with a particular theory.

Your theory does not work under my theory, so your theory must be wrong
It is a form of circular reasoning where the person tries to disprove a point of view by interpreting the facts through a different point of view.

There are many more logical fallacies avoid them.

A Discussion of Logic and Reason in Science

The set of principles and rules for reasoning is called logic. If used correctly beginning with the right starting point one will arrive at the correct conclusion.

Reasoning that starts with a given set premises and draws a conclusion is called deductive reasoning. Reasoning that draws a general conclusion based on a set of examples is called inductive reasoning. So deductive reasoning goes from general principles to specific conclusions and inductive reasoning goes from specific principles to general conclusions. Both of these types of logic are used in science.

Inductive and Deductive reasoning are different and even opposite concepts but in practice deductive and inductive reasoning are often used together even without knowing it.  For example one may be drawing a general conclusion form observed evidence (induction) based on general principles called assumptions. (deduction)

Mistakes in reasoning called Logical fallacies are some times made. This can happen both deliberately and accidentally. The important thing is to avoid them since they resultant in erroneous conclusions.

The Burden of Proof; an Issue in Science

The obligation of a party to provide sufficient evidence in support of their side of a dispute or issue is called the Burden of Proof.

Actually the term “burden of proof” is a bit strong implying the need to prove beyond a doubt. As a result it is really more like the burden of evidence since the side that has the burden of proof is obligated to provide evidence to back up their view point. However determining who has the burden of proof is not always easy to do because it varies in different circumstances and changes in the course of the discussion.

Under most circumstances the party making the claim has the burden of proof. However this is not an absolute rule given there are some circumstance that can change the burden of proof to the person denying a claim since a party making the new claim about an accepted idea has the burden of proof. For example those claiming that the Apollo Moon landings did not really happen have the Burden of proof.

The Burden of Proof Fallacy is the process of wrongfully trying to switch the burden of proof to your opponent. However the Burden of Proof can legitimately switch sides if new arguments have been made or evidence presented. If the opposition wishes to dispute the new evidence or argument, they have the burden of proof in doing so. Hence the burden of proof has switched.

A common problem in a discussion is agreeing on who has the burden of proof. It can consume much time and render a debate useless. Another problem is that since each side sees the issue differently it may be hard to agree on burden of proof.

Debate as a Tool of Science

A formal interactive discussion of opposing ideas on a specific topic is called a debate.

In science debate is a way of discussing competing theories where both sides get to make their case. Since both sides get to make their case it is an opportunity to learn about the other side as well as one’s own. However it is critical that both sides are given equal footing and respect which doses not always happen.

Because debates usually does not settle the dispute in practice debate is only useful as long the participants and observers learn from it. If no one learns anything from a debate it’s a waste of time.