Notes: Chapter 5 – Induc ve Arguments and Sta s cs
Unlike valid deduc ve arguments, an induc vely strong argument cannot guarantee that the conclusion is true—
but it can render the conclusion very probably true, even very, very likely to be true.
I. Enumera ve Induc on
Our main concern here is a common induc ve argument that reasons from premises about individual members
of a group to conclusions about the group as a whole (from par cular to general, or the part to the whole). In
such cases we begin with observa ons about some members of the group and end with a generaliza on about
all of them. This argument pa ern is called enumera ve induc on, and it’s a way of reasoning that we all nd
both natural and useful.
Using the examples in the text as a guide, in your own words, write out an enumera ve induc on:
Most people living in New York are apart of the Democra c Party
Anna lives in New York
Therefore, Anna is probably a Democrat
Enumera ve induc on comes with some useful terminology.
The group as a whole—the whole collec on of individuals in ques on—is called the target popula on or target
group.
The observed members of the target group are called the sample members or sample.
And the property we’re interested in is called the relevant property or property in ques on.
In the following example, the target group is the tennis balls in the bin. The sample is the observed tennis balls.
And the property is the quality of being excep onally bouncy.
Thirty six percent of the observed tennis balls from the bin are excep onally bouncy.
Therefore, 36 percent of all the tennis balls in the bin are probably excep onally bouncy.
a. Sample Size
The sample size of enumera ve induc on must be su ciently large for the argument to be good. Hasty
generaliza on is when you rely on a much too small sample size to draw a conclusion.
b. Representa veness
In addi on to being the proper size, a sample must be a representa ve sample—it must resemble the target
group in all the ways that ma er. If it does not properly represent the target group, it’s a biased sample. An
enumera ve induc ve argument is strong only if the sample is representa ve of the whole.
To be truly representa ve, the sample must be like the target group by (1) having all the same relevant
characteris cs and (2) having them in the same propor ons that the target group does. The “relevant
characteris cs” are features that could in uence the property in ques on. Given the examples below this quote
in the textbook, explain in your own words what (1) and (2) above mean.
1 means that the sample must be an accurate representa on of the a ributes of the target group in order for
there to be an accurate conclusion made. 2 means that the quan ty in the sample needs to be similar in
comparison to that of the target group.
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
tt
tt
ti
ti
ti
fl
ti
ti
ti
ti
ffi
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
tt
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
fi
II. Analogical Induc on
An analogy can be used to argue induc vely for a conclusion. Such an argument is known as an analogical
induc on, or simply an argument by analogy. An analogical induc on reasons this way: Because two or more
things are similar in several respects, they are likely to be similar in some further respect.
An argument by analogy, like all induc ve reasoning, can establish conclusions only with a degree of probability.
The greater the degree of probability between the two things being compared, the more probable the
conclusion is.
• The more relevant similari es there are between the things being compared, the more probable the
conclusion.
• Generally, the more relevant dissimilari es, or disanalogies, there are between the things being compared,
the less probable the conclusion.
• The greater the number of instances, or cases, that show the relevant similari es, the stronger the
argument.
• And we’ve noted that several cases (instead of just one) that exhibit the similari es can strengthen the
argument. In this criterion, however, we focus on a very di erent point: The greater the diversity among the
cases that exhibit the relevant similari es, the stronger the argument.
III. Opinion Polls
Enumera ve induc ons reach a high level of sophis ca on in the form of opinion polls conducted by
professional polling organiza ons. But as complex as they are, opinion polls are s ll essen ally induc ve
arguments (or the basis of induc ve arguments) and must be judged accordingly.
So as induc ve arguments, opinion polls should (1) be strong and (2) have true premises. More precisely, any
opinion poll worth believing must (1) use a large enough sample that accurately represents the target
popula on in all the relevant popula on features and (2) generate accurate data (the results must correctly
re ect what they purport to be about).
Be sure to know how ques on phrasing, ques on ordering, and restricted choices can nega vely impact the
strength of opinion poll results.
fl
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ff
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
ti
