Editing Deductive reasoning (section)

=== Deductivism ===
Deductivism is a philosophical position that gives primacy to deductive reasoning or arguments over their non-deductive counterparts.<ref name="Bermejo-Luque" /><ref name="Howson" /> It is often understood as the evaluative claim that only deductive inferences are ''good'' or ''correct'' inferences. This theory would have wide-reaching consequences for various fields since it implies that the rules of deduction are "the only acceptable standard of [[evidence]]".<ref name="Bermejo-Luque">{{Cite journal |last=Bermejo-Luque |first=Lilian |year=2020 |title=What is Wrong with Deductivism? |url=https://philpapers.org/rec/BERWIW-3 |journal=Informal Logic |volume=40 |issue=3 |pages=295–316 |doi=10.22329/il.v40i30.6214 |s2cid=217418605 |doi-access=free}}</ref> This way, the rationality or correctness of the different forms of inductive reasoning is denied.<ref name="Howson">{{Cite book |last=Howson |first=Colin |url=https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/0198250371.001.0001/acprof-9780198250371-chapter-6 |title=Hume's Problem |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2000 |isbn=978-0-198-25037-1 |chapter=Deductivism |doi=10.1093/0198250371.001.0001}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Kotarbinska |first=Janina |title=Twenty-Five Years of Logical Methodology in Poland |publisher=Springer Netherlands |year=1977 |isbn=978-9-401-01126-6 |pages=261–278 |chapter=The Controversy: Deductivism Versus Inductivism |doi=10.1007/978-94-010-1126-6_15 |chapter-url=https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-010-1126-6_15}}</ref> Some forms of deductivism express this in terms of degrees of reasonableness or probability. Inductive inferences are usually seen as providing a certain degree of support for their conclusion: they make it more likely that their conclusion is true. Deductivism states that such inferences are not rational: the premises either ensure their conclusion, as in deductive reasoning, or they do not provide any support at all.<ref name="Stove" />

One motivation for deductivism is the [[problem of induction]] introduced by [[David Hume]]. It consists in the challenge of explaining how or whether inductive inferences based on past experiences support conclusions about future events.<ref name="Howson" /><ref>{{Cite encyclopedia |year=2020 |title=The Problem of Induction |encyclopedia=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/induction-problem/ |access-date=14 March 2022 |last1=Henderson |first1=Leah}}</ref><ref name="Stove">{{Cite journal |last=Stove |first=D. |year=1970 |title=Deductivism |url=https://philpapers.org/rec/STOD |journal=Australasian Journal of Philosophy |volume=48 |issue=1 |pages=76–98 |doi=10.1080/00048407012341481|url-access=subscription }}</ref> For example, a chicken comes to expect, based on all its past experiences, that the person entering its coop is going to feed it, until one day the person "at last wrings its neck instead".<ref>{{Cite book |last=Russell |first=Bertrand |url=https://www.gutenberg.org/files/5827/5827-h/5827-h.htm |title=The Problems of Philosophy |year=2009 |chapter=On Induction |orig-date=1959 |via=Project Gutenberg}}</ref> According to [[Karl Popper]]'s falsificationism, deductive reasoning alone is sufficient. This is due to its truth-preserving nature: a theory can be falsified if one of its deductive consequences is false.<ref>{{Cite encyclopedia |year=2021 |title=Karl Popper: 4. Basic Statements, Falsifiability and Convention |encyclopedia=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/popper/#BasiStatFalsConv |access-date=14 March 2022 |last1=Thornton |first1=Stephen}}</ref><ref>{{Cite encyclopedia |title=Popper, Karl: Philosophy of Science |encyclopedia=Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |url=https://iep.utm.edu/pop-sci/ |access-date=14 March 2022 |last1=Shea |first1=Brendan}}</ref> So while inductive reasoning does not offer positive evidence for a theory, the theory still remains a viable competitor until falsified by [[Empirical evidence|empirical observation]]. In this sense, deduction alone is sufficient for discriminating between competing hypotheses about what is the case.<ref name="Howson" /> [[Hypothetico-deductivism]] is a closely related scientific method, according to which science progresses by formulating hypotheses and then aims to falsify them by trying to make observations that run counter to their deductive consequences.<ref>{{Cite encyclopedia |title=hypothetico-deductive method |encyclopedia=Encyclopædia Britannica |url=https://www.britannica.com/science/hypothetico-deductive-method |access-date=14 March 2022}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=hypothetico-deductive method |url=https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095954755 |access-date=14 March 2022 |website=Oxford Reference}}</ref>