Deductive and Inductive Reasoning

Induction and deduction are pervasive elements in critical thinking. Induction is usually described as moving from the specific to the general, while deduction begins with the general and ends with the specific. These two methods of reasoning have a very different "feel" to them when you're conducting research. Inductive reasoning, by its very nature, is more open-ended and exploratory, especially at the beginning. Deductive reasoning is more narrow in nature and is concerned with testing or confirming hypotheses. Even though a particular study may look like it's purely deductive, most social research involves both inductive and deductive reasoning processes at some time in the project. In fact, we could combine the two styles of thinking into a single circular one that continually cycles from theories down to observations and back up again to theories.

DEDUCTIVE REASONING

Deductive reasoning arrives at a specific conclusion based on generalizations.

Deductive reasoning typically moves from general truths to specific conclusions. It opens with an expansive explanation and continues with predictions for specific observations supporting it. Deductive reasoning is narrow in nature and is concerned with testing or confirming a hypothesis. It is dependent on its premises. For example, a false premise can lead to a false result, and inconclusive premises will also yield an inconclusive conclusion. Deductive reasoning leads to a confirmation (or not) of our original theories. It guarantees the correctness of a conclusion. Logic is the authority in the deductive method. 

"If-then-but-therefore" deductive reasoning is how deductive thinkers can test alternate hypotheses. Making deductions is important when we cannot directly observe a cause, and can only observe its consequences.

Examples of Deductive Reasoning

The major premise;

Most of Malaysians transformed to a monster behind a vehicle steering wheels. 

The minor premise; 

I am a Malaysian too

The conclusion;

Since Most of Malaysians "transformed to a monster" behind a vehicle steering wheels and the fact that I am a Malaysian too, therefore, I Should "transform to a monster" and drive recklessly too. If you can't beat them, join them.

INDUCTIVE REASONING

Inductive reasoning takes events and makes generalizations

Inductive reasoning is essentially the opposite of deductive reasoning. It involves trying to create general principles by starting with many specific instances.

Inductive reasoning moves from specific details and observations to the more general underlying principles or process that explains them. It is open-ended and exploratory, especially at the beginning. The premises of an inductive argument are believed to support the conclusion, but do not ensure it. Thus, the conclusion of an induction is regarded as a hypothesis. In the Inductive method, also called the scientific method, observation of nature is the authority.

Examples of Inductive Reasoning

The major premise;

Everyone will die, eventually.

The minor premise;

God make decision who should live and who shouldn't.

I am one of  God's many servants

The conclusion (argument);So, why should I drive carefully? I might drive carefully but the others? Furthermore, it really doesn't matter if I drive carefully or not since my fate and the other drivers are decided, upon a long time ago. "Alaa.. on drive slow also can die one, Better drive fast fast maa. Accident - accident lah."