Deductive and Inductive Reasoning (Bacon vs Aristotle - Scientific Revolution)

Man, I did't know that Math Damon was so smart

Preparing for exams and watching your videos . Sir, you are truly a gem

Thank you sir, you are the one who acually knows how to teach. it is very kind of you. I remain grateful to you. very helpful and understandable. love from pakistan

Wow, philosophers speak with a Southern Accent, Aristotle is a philosopher so Aristotle speaks with a Southern Accent, and since I speak with a Southern Accent, I'm as smart as Aristotle...Cool!

Awesome video! I've watched dozens of youtube videos on inductive vs deductive reasoning and I started to get the sense that deductive thinkers rely on "facts" having "absolute" or "black/white" qualities to them. I tend to use inductive forms of reasoning most of the time, because there's always a chance that a past "fact" or occurrence isn't going to happen again tomorrow. Thus, it isn't really a "fact". You nailed it on the head to suggest that inductive thinkers rely more heavily on PROBABILITY as defining their interpretations of what "facts" are and how they could potentially behave. For example, in quantum tunneling, (a particle could suddenly manifest itself across the universe over billions of lights years) anything could disappear or manifest itself from one area to the other side of the universe. Quantum tunneling is a real phenomenon - it's how stars fuse most of their various atoms together to create heavier elements...stars aren't hot enough at their cores to fuse atoms. So in your example, there's a possibility that the sun may not rise tomorrow - there's a very tiny possibility that all the particles which make it up, quantum tunnel to another/other parts of the universe. Inductive thinkers are going to have problems with formal logic. Inductive thinkers will see formal logic as too rigid and narrow-minded. I had major problems with formal logic when I went to law school...I thought too abstractly and in terms of probability too much - nothing seemed to be a definite fact to me.

Flashback to those times at three am when you didn't understand a word of your Philosophy homework that was worth 50% of your overall grade.

Thank you so much Tom. I watched a few other videos from other sources on Induction and it did not clarify it so much as your video. You basically nailed it for me. Thank you for the video. I have philosophy exams in a week and your video was spot on and helped me a lot.

man thank you so much. good quick video, give good examples, well spoken. and most of all go to the point with out fluff for the first half.

i know this comment is late, but great job! I wish all teachers could be so informative and explain things in analogies like you do!

“You said bottom” ... scary stuff

I've read a lot of articles about deductive and inductive method and haven't understood any. This video is the first thing that made me understand these two methods. Thank you for posting this vid. Though I expected further explanation about inductive reasoning, well it was great.

Smartest man with a southern accent i have ever heard.

Wow, thanks. I’m studying college biology and this is the first time this concept was brought up and I was confused on the difference. Your examples really helped. Thanks! Also, I think there for I am is my favorite quote lol.

I could not understand clearly the two concepts prior to watching your video lecture. But now, it's a piece of cake! I am thankful to you Sir for the creative video.

Greetings from Belgium! I'm a student in literature and spend my life reading books. I'm saying that in order to ensure you (if you would even need that ^^) that your videos have a good level of accuracy and I rarely find errors in your works on European history, which becomes more and more uncommon on other American channels... Anyway, I'm glad that I can sum up my readings by watching your nice videos with your lovely Southerner accent and, moreover, by doing this, improve my English! :D

Awesome explanation! I'm reading 'The Story of Philosophy' by 'Will Durrant' and I admit I was a bit lost on Francis Bacon, you've really simplified it for me, thankyou!

"Deductive reasoning has been around a lot longer." Deductive and inductive reasoning have always been around; those specific words may not have been used to describe them, but they have always existed.

And you just saved me from failing a quiz! Thanks from homeschoolers everywhere!

Absolutely fascinating. Thank you for an excellent explanation.

Excellent presentation and I was so happy to hear your conclusion 8:01 agrees with my thinking, that they are both the tools of science, and should be used alternately or as required for the purpose. I would add to your statement "They are both tools of science" that they are <i>complementary</i> tools of science, they require each other, just as addition and subtraction, multiplication and division, derivative and integral, are all required to operate in both directions.