Inductive vs deductive reasoning problems

  • Thread starter Thread starter instantresults
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on whether the "moral of the story" in narratives, such as Aesop's fables, constitutes an inductive conclusion. It is noted that inductive reasoning involves deriving general principles from specific observations. In the case of Aesop's fables, while the morals seem to illustrate established truths, they are argued to be constructed to support pre-existing rules rather than derived from the stories themselves. However, the stories do reflect common human behaviors, suggesting that a broader understanding of these behaviors could lead to inductive conclusions about the morals. Thus, while the morals may not emerge directly from the stories, they can still be seen as inductively concluded from collective human experiences.
instantresults
Messages
11
Reaction score
1
If you were to tell a story that has some moral lesson in it, is the "moral of the story" an inductive conclusion? For example, many versions of Aesop's fables include a short moral of the story at the end of it. Is that a type of inductive conclusion? I understand induction as moving from specifics to a generalized conclusion, isn't that what is happening in a story like that? Thanks for any help
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'd say, yes, that's true.
While the conclusion of a deductive argument is certain, the truth of the conclusion of an inductive argument is probable, based upon the evidence given. Many dictionaries define inductive reasoning as the derivation of general principles from specific observations, though some sources disagree with this usage.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductive_reasoning
 
instantresults said:
If you were to tell a story that has some moral lesson in it, is the "moral of the story" an inductive conclusion? For example, many versions of Aesop's fables include a short moral of the story at the end of it. Is that a type of inductive conclusion? I understand induction as moving from specifics to a generalized conclusion, isn't that what is happening in a story like that? Thanks for any help
In the case of Aesop's Fables, I think what you have are illustrations of 'rules of thumb' that are already assumed to be true by some reasoning completely separate from the illustrations rather than being derived from the illustrations by any logic, deductive or inductive. The pre-existing "moral" obviously drives the construction of the illustrative story. The stories can't be literally true: they're full of talking animals. So, it's obvious the stories are constructed to support the rules of thumb they illustrate, and the lesson or moral didn't actually emerge from that story.

On the other hand, the stories accurately encapsulate chronic human behaviors and large numbers of anecdotes could be gathered that demonstrate people behaving, for example, like the hare in the story of the tortoise and the hare, or like the frog in this story or the ass in that story, etc. and from those anecdotes the moral could be inductively concluded. So when you ask if this is a "type" of inductive conclusion, I lean toward saying, "I think so."
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
3K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
5K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
8K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
10K