The method of induction in logic

Induction is such a way of making a logical conclusion, in which the general position comes from the private. Such inference through mathematical, psychological and factual representations connects several prerequisites together. This approach is based on the belief that in nature absolutely all phenomena depend on each other.

For the first time the term "induction" is found in Socrates, but its meaning was significantly different from the modern one. He believed that the comparison of several particular cases, with the exception of false ones, makes it possible to give the concept a general definition. Aristotle went further: he had already pointed out the differences between full and incomplete induction, but had not yet been able to explain the rights and the basis of the latter. He considered this kind of inference to be the complete opposite of syllogism.

When philosophers of the Renaissance began to actively rebel against the views of Aristotle, the method of induction was declared to be the only productive in natural science. He was sharply contrasted with the syllogistic approach of the ancient Greek philosopher.

It is believed that the method of induction, practically in the form in which it was adopted in modern science, was put forward by F. Bacon. Although he actually already had such predecessors as Leonardo da Vinci and some other thinkers. In words, Bacon did not attach any importance to syllogism. But in practice, its induction can not do without this concept. F. Bacon believed that the generalization should be carried out gradually and take into account the three rules, consider the manifestation of a certain property on three sides:

1) a review of negative cases;

2) a review of positive cases;

3) a review of those cases in which the property manifests itself in varying degrees, with different strengths. And starting from all this, you can derive a generalization.

Thus, according to Bacon, it turns out that without a syllogism, that is, without bringing the subject under investigation, to general conclusions, one can not deduce a new proposition. And this means that the scientist could not fully oppose the inductive method of deductive, which put forward Descartes. And yet F. Bacon did not stop there. Realizing that his method has drawbacks, he suggested ways of overcoming them. Thus, he believed that the probabilistic nature of this method, its incompleteness, will gradually be overcome by the knowledge accumulated by people in many spheres of life.

The method of induction can be of two kinds: complete and incomplete. In the first case, any statement will be proved until the last special case, until all options are exhausted. The conclusion is quite reliable. This method of doubt does not cause. In addition, it expands the knowledge of a person about a certain subject.

The method of incomplete induction, on the contrary, observation of specific, individual cases leads to a hypothesis, which then must also be proved. From the point of view of logic, he offers insufficient arguments, the conclusion made with his help may be erroneous. This induction method needs some more proofs, since it has a probabilistic character. However, errors are possible in both cases. They are due to the fact that the investigation, which is dealt with by conducting research, can pick up too many reasons, which, moreover, can relate to a different time period.

The most perfect kind of induction is scientific induction. In it, the conclusion about the properties of objects belonging to the same class is made after investigating their internal conditioning. This distinguishes it from ordinary induction, in which the properties of the studied object are considered spontaneously, randomly.

By the way, this way of making inferences is characteristic not only of logic. Methods of scientific induction are common in philosophy, physics, medicine, economics and jurisprudence.