**Inductive Arguments**

Non-deductive logic is reasoning using arguments in which the premises support the conclusion but do not entail it. Forms of non-deductive logic include the statistical syllogism, which argues from generalizations true for the most part, and induction, a form of reasoning that makes generalizations based on individual instances. An inductive argument is said to be *cogent* if and only if the truth of the argument's premises would render the truth of the conclusion probable (i.e., the argument is *strong*), and the argument's premises are, in fact, true. Cogency can be considered inductive logic's analogue to deductive logic's "soundness." Despite its name, mathematical induction is not a form of inductive reasoning. The problem of induction is the philosophical question of whether inductive reasoning is valid.

Read more about this topic: Argument

### Other articles related to "inductive arguments, inductive, argument":

**Inductive Arguments**

...

**Inductive arguments**argue their conclusions through

**inductive**reasoning ... The atheist-existentialist

**argument**for the non-existence of a perfect sentient being states that if existence precedes essence, it follows from the meaning of the term sentient that a sentient being ... The

**argument**is echoed thus in Salman Rushdie's novel Grimus "That which is complete is also dead." The "no reason"

**argument**tries to show that an omnipotent and ...

### Famous quotes containing the word arguments:

“Nothing requires a greater effort of thought than *arguments* to justify the rule of non-thought.”

—Milan Kundera (b. 1929)