The term "induction" means one way to verify the conclusion. The inductive method of thinking, according to philosophers, is a way of constructing thought. Which helps to find any homogeneous sign, and with its help draw a conclusion about the final result. In simple terms: if, in order to create a logical conclusion, the same signs of something are sought out in several sources of information. This is inductive thinking.
They contrast him with deduction - when several conclusions are deduced from one available sign. Recall Sherlock Holmes, who, by the dirt on his boots, could determine where the guest came from, what he did before the trip, during and after it. A person, in order to make a decision or draw a correct conclusion, applies both methods together. If you use the deductive and inductive methods of thinking separately, the probability of incorrect conclusions is high.
Historical excursion
The concept of "induction" was first highlighted in ancient Greece. Local philosophers were particularly interested in knowing the human brain and the principles of its work. Who is the founder of the inductive method of thinking?
The first to mention this method in his works is Socrates. In his research, he interpreted induction differently. In his understanding, several of the investigated traits may indicate different conclusions. Behind him, Aristotle called inductive thinking a comparative analysis of signs and a conclusion based on the general indicator obtained from them. The philosopher contrasted induction with syllogism as a search for an averaged attribute. In the Renaissance, this theory was sharply criticized.
Syllogism was no longer studied at all as a research method for obtaining reliable information. Induction was considered the surest way to determine the truth. The modern concept of this method was defined by Francis Bacon. The syllogism, in his opinion, is not credible. However, the concept of inductive thinking in its interpretation of the syllogic does not contradict. Bacon’s method is based on comparison. The scientist believed that in order to come to a reliable conclusion about something, it is necessary to analyze all the available signs and identify similarities. After combining the data and get a clear picture of the vision of the true essence of the event.
The next who contributed to the study of the inductive way of thinking was John Mill. Supporter of the theory that the syllogism method should not combine similar features. It will be more correct to consider each of them individually. Inductive thinking, he characterized as the study of homogeneous signs of a single phenomenon. Conclusions based on common features are made by the following methods:
- Consent. If several phenomena have one common symptom, it is their cause.
- Difference. If two phenomena among the mass of similar signs have one difference - this is their reason.
- Leftovers. After studying all the signs of the phenomenon, those remain that cannot be attributed to its causes at first glance. Despite the fact that they sometimes seem absurd, often one of them is the reason for the phenomenon being studied.
- Matching changes. When various phenomena change under the influence of one circumstance - it carries the essence of the cause.
As can be seen from the methods of study, Bacon's theory is based on the principles of deduction. The residual method, for example, where the derivation is constructed from particular features.
Features of the inductive method of constructing output
There are two types of induction:
- General induction (complete). Of several phenomena, each is studied in turn. Look for a match with a specific given attribute. In the case when all the phenomena are similar in this sign - they have a common nature. For example: all books in English are published by the publisher in hardcover. All books in French are published by the publisher in hardcover. English and French are foreign languages. The publisher publishes all books in foreign languages in hardcover. As can be seen from the example, inductive thinking does not always bring a truly correct solution.
- Selective induction (private). The conclusion from this method is often not reliable. Selectively compare the signs of phenomena. Based on the results of the study, we conclude that the phenomena are similar. This particular conclusion is not always correct. For example: Sugar dissolves in water, salt dissolves in water, soda dissolves in water. Sugar, salt and soda are granular bulk products. Probably all granular bulk products dissolve in water.
Using
Inductive thinking as the only true way to obtain reliable information cannot be used. Together with deductive, they constitute a comprehensive in-depth study of the selected one or more phenomena. The general conclusion obtained by the deductive method is confirmed by signs identified by induction. Using two methods at the same time gives a person the opportunity to build a reliable conclusion by comprehensively studying its elements. Those signs that are not true themselves will disappear in the process of processing information.
The result is selected by comparing the remaining, most likely elements, suitable for all parameters. Judging by the work of Descartes and other scientists who studied this phenomenon, conclusions were drawn using a combination of deductive and inductive thinking. The appearance of false conclusions in this way was minimized. The scientist who is trying to "fit" the signs to the desired conclusion has obvious problems. If you use both ways of thinking.
The role of induction in psychology
Often, in patients with psychologists, the inductive method of thinking prevails in reasoning. As a result, there are a lot of conclusions that do not correspond to reality. The manifestation of pathologies of thinking is manifested from improperly used deduction. Such findings pose a threat to the patient's life.
Example
A person decides that food is harmful. He completely refuses meals. The sight and smell of food causes him panic attacks. The psyche ceases to cope and he cannot eat. In moments of emotional crisis, a manifestation of aggression is characteristic, an eating disorder may be accompanied by bulimia or anorexia.
This phenomenon is called “fixation”. Deduction helps to deal with it. Treatment should be carried out under the supervision of a professional psychologist, preferably having practice in this form of deviations.
How to develop logical thinking
Psychologists advise several ways of developing thinking:
- To solve problems. Mathematics is the clearest example of deduction and induction in the aggregate. Solving problems allows us to distinguish truth from lies and teaches us to draw the right conclusions.
- New knowledge. It is recommended to read more, examples from books develop a thought form. A man builds interconnected chains of events in his head, trains the construction of logical conclusions.
- Accuracy. To seek specifics in judgments and conclusions. Only exact formulations and concretized conclusions give the concept of a true reliable phenomenon.
- The development of flexibility of thinking. The experience that a person receives from life in general and from communication affects his judgment. A narrow-minded person is not able to build many probabilities in the development of events or to explain the phenomenon most fully.
- Observations. They comprise the inner experience of the individual. Based on observations, all the conclusions in the life of the individual are built.
Psychological induction, in most cases, means the development of a disease in a person or his immersion in an abnormal state.
Cons Induction
Inductive thinking is limited by logical conclusions. The presence of similar signs in the subject of study does not prove its reliability. There should be several signs proving the truth of the phenomenon, only then it can be argued that it is true.
Using exclusively inductive thinking makes the conclusions implausible. The construction of thoughts in this way involves the subsequent consideration of similar symptoms with regard to their causes and combinations. The purpose of this analysis: to obtain evidence of correct conclusions. They must meet the criteria of logic and rationalism.
Differences in thinking methods
Deduction is characterized by the search for similar traits. After, on the basis of logical conclusions, the conclusion is built. Variants of probable events arise from the logical conclusions that a person receives using a chain of inferences. In the books of Arthur Conan Doyle, the famous detective demonstrates this method of thinking. The philosopher Descartes called the deductive method of thinking intuitive. Continuous reflection leads to a logical, sometimes unexpected, true conclusion.
Inductive thinking is often used to test hypotheses derived from deductive constructions of thought. Thus, induction cannot select a reliable phenomenon, but it can select its features with surprising accuracy.
Examples
Inductive way of thinking: the subject of jokes is the so-called “female logic”. When a conclusion is made from one incorrectly spoken word about the speaker or about what he wanted to say with his phrase.
For example: the husband said that I did not finish the salad, the husband noticed that the stain on the T-shirt did not remove, the husband did not praise me for the cleanliness in the apartment. Conclusion: my husband believes that I am a bad housewife. Although in fact the conclusion is not substantiated here. The studied signs merely illustrate the behavior of the husband.
The deductive method in this case would look like this: "my husband said that I salted the salad, he did not like the taste of the salad, the salad is not tasty." Conclusion: "I do not cook deliciously, according to my husband." This is an example of the notorious "female logic", because of which scandals in the family often begin.
Finally
Any conclusion obtained by inductive thinking requires a mandatory double-check on logic. In most cases, these conclusions are incorrect. To obtain a reliable conclusion and make the right decision, it is required to double-check the similarity of signs, build logical chains and substantiate the results.