Almost every website that talks about it says, “Inductive reasoning is a bottom up” approach while “deductive is a top down approach”.
Can anyone explain to me the THE DIFFERENCE? What makes these two forms of reasoning so different? Examples are always appreciated as well.
In: 121
To understand the top down / bottom up analogy, think of the problem as a tower, with the answer/conclusion at the bottom; and the facts/clues stacked on top.
Now consider one piece of the tower is missing, how do you figure out its shape?
Deductive reasoning/top down approach is you look at all the clues and reach a conclusion of the right shape. Sherlock is a great example of this kind of reasoning. It does have its weaknesses, as it assumes all of the facts are correct and interpreted correctly.
Inductive reasoning/bottom up is you look at the conclusion and the clues you do have and figure out the missing clue. It still suffers from the same weaknesses of veracity of information.
In an example, let’s say you have a crime scene: three suspects, 1 gun, 1 bullet hole in a wall. You’re trying to figure out who made that shot.
If all you have is the bullet hole and the gun, you can use inductive reasoning to determine that the shot was made from a lower angle, so the shortest suspect is the most likely to have made the shot.
However, if you have more information, such as gun shot residue on the tallest suspect you can use deductive reasoning to say that even though it’s a lower angled shot, maybe the tallest suspect was crouching. However, this conclusion might not be valid if there is missing or contradictory information.
Neither method is right or wrong, it depends on what you’re looking for and what you’re starting with. Often you’ll use a combination of both to confirm that both the facts and conclusions support each other.
Latest Answers