proclaimed that there was a universal code of conduct for all humans which
could be ascertained by pure reason. However, induction provides some
justification for using a value that applies to one case in a second case that
bears some similarity to the first.
(2)
Ascertaining Causal Laws. Induction, along with deduction, plays a part
in establishing the plausible existence of a causal law. Put simply, if the
supposed causal law works every time, it is likely that the supposed law exists.
This is an inductive form of reasoning.
(3)
Proving Facts. Induction is used in court to prove facts. There it is
often referred to as inference rather than induction. Inductive reasoning in
proving facts is based on the notion that particular individuals and the world in
general exhibit patterns of behaviour. To illustrate this, assume that there is a
pattern of behaviour that involves X, Y and Z occurring together. In a case and
it is clear that X and Z have occurred. Inductive reasoning argues that Y has
also occurred since X, Y and Z commonly go together.
Abduction
Nature of Abduction
Abduction seeks explanations for events. Let us assume that B has occurred.
Assume also that there are four identifiable possible explanations (or
hypotheses) for the occurrence of B, namely X causes B, Y causes B, Z
causes B and A causes B. Investigation suggests that the most plausible
explanation is that A causes B.
Observation
B has occurred
Explanation
There is a rule, Rule R, that says: “A causes B”.
Strength of Explanation
No other explanation explains B as well as Rule R.
Conclusion
Therefore, Rule R that “A causes B” is probably correct.
Figure 4.3 Form of Abduction
Operation of Abduction
Abduction is used in two tasks.
(1)
Proving Facts. Proving facts is essentially abductive. A court is not
required to prove a fact by showing that it is absolutely true. Instead it only
has to show that it satisfies some stipulated probability, which lawyers refer to
as the standard of proof. Since the required probability is greater than 50%
proving facts by reference to the legal standard of proof is always abductive.
(2)
Ascertaining a Causal Law. Abductive reasoning can be used in
ascertaining a causal law. In the early stages of scientific investigation of causal
laws of behaviour abduction might suggest a good working hypothesis that
can be tested by experimentation.
 |
 |
 |