Question

Which of the following is NOT an inductive argument? Select one:

a. an argument based on signs or symptoms
b. a causal inference
c. an argument from analogy
d. an argument from definition
e. a prediction

Answer 1

An argument from definition is not an inductive argument. Inductive reasoning is based on observations and patterns to make generalizations, whereas an argument from definition relies on the meaning of words, which is a form of deductive reasoning.

Step-by-step explanation:

Among the options provided, an argument from definition is NOT an inductive argument. Inductive reasoning involves making generalizations based on specific observations or cases, and it includes reasoning from patterns, analogies, or specific to general instances. Examples of inductive reasoning include arguments based on signs, causal inferences, analogies, or predictions. On the other hand, an argument from definition is based on the meaning of words or phrases and typically utilizes deductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning starts with a general principle and applies it to a specific case to derive a conclusion.

For example, if we define a bachelor as an unmarried man, we can deductively conclude that John is a bachelor if we know John is an unmarried man. This conclusion doesn’t come from inductive generalizations; it is based on the definition of the word 'bachelor.' Therefore, in a list of inductive arguments, the argument from definition stands out as not fitting the pattern.