The Nature of Reasoning

Logical reasoning is a mental activity that aims to arrive at a conclusion in a rigorous way. It happens in
the form of inferences or arguments by starting from a set of premises and reasoning to a conclusion
supported by these premises. The premises and the conclusion are propositions, i.e. true or false claims
about what is the case. Together, they form an argument. Logical reasoning is norm-governed in the
sense that it aims to formulate correct arguments that any rational person would find convincing. The
main discipline studying logical reasoning is logic.

Distinct types of logical reasoning differ from each other concerning the norms they employ and the
certainty of the conclusion they arrive at. Deductive reasoning offers the strongest support: the premises
ensure the conclusion, meaning that it is impossible for the conclusion to be false if all the premises are
true. Such an argument is called a valid argument, for example: all men are mortal; Socrates is a man;
therefore, Socrates is mortal. For valid arguments, it is not important whether the premises are actually
true but only that, if they were true, the conclusion could not be false. Valid arguments follow a rule of
inference, such as modus ponens or modus tollens. Deductive reasoning plays a central role in formal
logic and mathematics.

We generally divide inference into two types: inductive and deductive. Inductive inference refers to the
ability to make generalizations from specific observations, while deductive inference refers to coming to
specific conclusions from a set of general premises.
Types of Inference
1. Deductive Inference
Deductive reasoning, also known as deduction or deductive inference, is a type of reasoning that
involves taking a generally true statement and narrowing it down to apply to a specific instance.

So, when someone thinks that in general, something is true, then they will infer that it also is true in
their specific circumstance.

Usually, we can come to a logical conclusion through the process of deductive inference. Most things
necessarily follow from a set of general premises or hypotheses. Essentailly, if the generalized premises
are universally true, then the conclusion must be true.

However, be cautious. Sometimes something is generally true but not necessarily true in all instances.
Such is the case, for example, when we engage in stereotyping. While it’s generally true that people from
rural Utah are Mormans, plenty of rural Utahns aren’t Mormons, too. The general premise is not a
universal truth, so we cannot use deductive inference alone to reach our conclusion when we meet
someone from rural Utah.

Example 1

Premises: All birds have feathers. Penguins are birds.

Conclusion: Therefore, penguins have feathers.

Example 2

Premises: If it rains, then the streets get wet. It’s raining.

Conclusion: Therefore, the streets are wet.

Example 3

Premises: No mammals are cold-blooded. All reptiles are cold-blooded.

Conclusion: Therefore, no reptiles are mammals.

Pros of Deductive Inference

1. Provides conclusions that are logically certain.

2. If the premises are true and the form of the argument is valid, the conclusion must be true.
3. Used in various fields, including mathematics and logic, where certainty is required.

Cons of Deductive Inference

1. Limited to what is contained in the premises. It cannot provide new information, only clarify
what is already known.
2. The certainty of the conclusion is dependent on the truth of the premises, which may not always
be easily determined.
3. The premises must be universal – in every single case – to avoid making mistakes.
. Inductive Inference
Inductive reasoning, also known as induction or inductive inference, is a type of reasoning that involves
making broad generalizations from specific observations. It is the opposite of deduction.

Here, we’re going from one instance to a generalization, rather than applying a generalization to a
specific instance. Inductive reasoning has its place in many instances of logical thinking, and even
sometimes the scientific method. For example, a set of data may be collected, and based on the data,
tentative generalized models are developed to describe that data. But the conclusions drawn from
inductive reasoning need to be considered probable rather than certain because oftentimes
observations of one case study cannot be generalized to everyone.

Let’s take the example of swans. You might see a flock of swans in a pond, and they’re all white. So, you
develop an inductive inference that “all swans are white.” While true in your pond, it turns out that
elsewhere, there are black swans, so you’ve made a mistake making this inductive inference.

Example 1

Observation: Every time you have seen a swan, it has been white.

Generalization: Therefore, all swans are white.

Example 2

Observation: You’ve just eaten at a restaurant five times, and each time the food has been delicious.

Generalization: Therefore, the food at this restaurant is always good.

Example 3

Observation: Every winter that you’ve experienced has been cold.

Generalization: Therefore, every winter is cold.

Pros of Inductive Inference

1. Allows for generalizations and predictions, making it particularly useful in science and everyday life.

2. Can deal with premises that are uncertain or probabilistic.

Cons of Inductive Inference

1. Conclusions are not guaranteed to be true, even if the premises are true.

2. Susceptible to the problem of induction – just because something has always been observed to be a
certain way, doesn’t guarantee it will always be that way
3. Abductive Inference
Abductive inference, also known as abduction or inference to the best explanation, is a form of logical
inference which starts with an observation or set of observations and then seeks the simplest and most
likely explanation. In abductive reasoning, the premises do not guarantee the conclusion. The conclusion
is what best explains the premises and is subject to revision as new evidence emerges. Remember, the
conclusion in abductive inference is what seems most likely based on the information available at that
moment, and you’re willing to change your mind. As new evidence becomes available, the conclusion
might change.

Example 1

Observation: The grass is wet.

Best Explanation: It rained last night.

Example 2

Observation: You come home to find your house in disarray with items scattered around.

Best Explanation: A burglary took place while you were out.

Example 3

Observation: A patient is presenting symptoms like fever, cough, and loss of taste and smell.

Best Explanation: The patient might have contracted COVID-19.

Pros of Abductive Inference

1. Useful in generating possible explanations, making it valuable in diagnostic and investigative

settings.
2. Allows for creative and innovative thinking by generating new hypotheses and theories.

Cons of Abductive Inference

1. Offers no logical guarantee that the best explanation is the correct one.
2. Often relies on subjective judgement to determine what is the “best” explanation.

4. Statistical Inference
Statistical inference is used in economics, mathematics, and quantitative research to produce
generalizations and models. It involves the process of using data analysis to infer properties of an
underlying probability distribution. Statistical inference allows you to make predictions or draw
conclusions about a larger set of data (population) based on a smaller set of data (sample). The most
important thing to remember about statistical inference is that your dataset needs to be representative
of the general population that you are studying and be sizable enough to have statistical relevance.
Remember, statistical inference involves a degree of uncertainty because conclusions are drawn about a
whole population based on a subset of it. Statistical tests can provide information about the degree of
uncertainty, usually in the form of a p-value or confidence interval.

Example 1

Descriptive Statistics: A company might survey a sample of its customers about their satisfaction with the
company’s products. The average satisfaction score among those surveyed is a descriptive statistic that
summarizes the data.

Example 2

Inferential Statistics (Confidence Intervals): A pharmaceutical company tests a new drug on a small group
of volunteers. The average improvement in symptoms serves as the basis for a confidence interval, from
which the company predicts the range within which the average improvement for the entire population
of patients (if all were treated) would fall.

Example 3

Inferential Statistics (Hypothesis Testing): An educational researcher wants to know if a new teaching
method is more effective than the current one. They test the new method on a group of students and
the old method on another group. They then compare average test scores between the two groups to
determine if there is a statistically significant difference, which would suggest the new method is more
(or less) effective.

Pros of Statistical Inference

1. Allows predictions about a large population based on a smaller sample

2. Invaluable in research, economics, social sciences, and more for hypothesis testing, estimation,
and prediction.

Cons of Statistical Inference

1. Subject to sampling error and bias, which can affect the accuracy of predictions.
2. Requires assumptions about the population that may not hold true.

5. Causal Inference
Causal inference is the process of drawing a conclusion about a causal connection, that is, cause and
effect. It is a complex task as it often involves establishing the direction and magnitude of cause and
effect relationships. One of the most valuable research methods for determining causal inference is
experimental research where researchers can examine variables under controlled environments to test
causal relationships between variables. Researchers may also use longitudinal studies, which takes cross-
sectional data at various points in time to plot changes in variables, to make causal inferences. Keep in
mind, while causal inference suggests a possible cause-and-effect relationship, it does not confirm it.
Correlation does not necessarily imply causation, and there could be other factors at play.

Example 1

Observation: Smoking rates increase. Lung cancer rates also increase.

Possible Causal Inference: Smoking might cause lung cancer.

Example 2

Observation: A city introduces a bike sharing program. The number of bike accidents in the city
increases.

Possible Causal Inference: The introduction of the bike sharing program may have caused an increase in
bike accidents.

Example 3

Observation: Students who participate in an after-school program have higher grades than those who
don’t.

Possible Causal Inference: Participating in the after-school program may cause students to have higher
grades.

Pros of Causal Inference

1. Helps establish cause-and-effect relationships, which are important for understanding and
predicting phenomena.
2. Invaluable in fields such as medicine, economics, and social sciences.

Cons of Causal Inference

1. Observational data can lead to confounding, where extraneous variables affect both the cause
and effect, leading to spurious associations.
2. The complexity of real-world phenomena can make it difficult to establish clear causal
relationships.

6. Analogical Inference
Analogical inference (or analogical reasoning) is a type of reasoning that involves drawing conclusions
based on the perceived similarity between separate cases. In other words, if two things are similar in
some ways, it’s likely that they will be similar in other ways, too. While analogical inference can be a
powerful tool, it’s also based on the assumption of similarity, which may not always hold true. As with
most examples of inference explored here, there tends to be room for error and mistakes in reasoning,
especially when confounding or hidden variables come into play. For example, there can be differences
between situations that are not immediately apparent, and these can affect the outcome. The classic
example of the flaw of analogical inference is that of Linnean taxonomic rankings in biology (i.e. species
groupings). The taxonomic ranking system was entirely based on visible similarities between animals. But
as science developed, it was realized that visible similarities and traits did not necessarily imply
evolutionary closeness, which gave rise to the more accurate phylogenetic classification which groups
animals based on a more accurate evolutionary tree. Therefore, conclusions reached through analogical
inference should be treated as hypotheses that need further testing and validation.

Example 1

Observation: Animals that are mammals usually give birth to live young. Dogs are mammals.
Analogical Inference: Dogs likely give birth to live young.

Example 2

Observation: You studied diligently for your math test and scored an A.

Analogical Inference: If you study diligently for your physics test, you will likely score an A.

Example 3

Observation: In the past, cutting taxes has led to an increase in consumer spending.

Analogical Inference: If the government cuts taxes now, it will likely lead to an increase in consumer
spending.

Pros of Analogical Inference

1. Useful for problem-solving, decision-making, and generating hypotheses.

2. Allows for creativity and innovation by applying knowledge from one domain to another.

Cons of Analogical Inference

1. The validity of the inference is dependent on the degree of similarity between the cases, which
can be subjective.
2. Risk of overlooking important differences between the cases.

7. Invalid Inference
Invalid inference refers to a type of logical fallacy where the conclusion drawn does not logically follow
from the premises. We might also call this a logical fallacy. This can happen in several ways, including
ignoring important information, assuming something that isn’t justified, or misapplying a valid form of
reasoning. These can all lead to conclusions that are not supported by the evidence or the argument.

Example 1: Affirming the Consequent

This is a logical fallacy where the consequent of a conditional statement is affirmed, leading to the
affirmation of the antecedent. For instance:

Premise: If it is raining, then the ground is wet.

Observation: The ground is wet.

Invalid Inference: Therefore, it is raining.

The fallacy here is that there are other reasons why the ground could be wet (for instance, someone
could’ve spilled water).

Example 2: Denying the Antecedent

This is a logical fallacy where the antecedent of a conditional statement is denied, leading to the denial
of the consequent. For instance:
Premise: If John is a bachelor, then John is unmarried.

Observation: John is not a bachelor.

Invalid Inference: Therefore, John is not unmarried.

The fallacy here is assuming that being a bachelor is the only way John can be unmarried. He could be
divorced or widowed and still be unmarried.

Example 3: Hasty Generalization

This is an informal fallacy of faulty generalization by reaching an inductive generalization based on

insufficient evidence. For instance:

Observation: My Christian friend supports gay marriage.

Invalid Inference: Therefore, all Christians support gay marriage.

The fallacy here is generalizing about a large group (all Christians) based on a sample that is not large
enough or representative enough (my friend).

These are just a few examples of invalid inferences. There are many other ways in which an inference can
be invalid, including fallacies of relevance (where the premises are not relevant to the conclusion),
fallacies of presumption (where the conclusion assumes something that isn’t justified), and fallacies of
ambiguity (where unclear language leads to a misleading conclusion).

Pros of Invalid Inference

1. There are generally no pros to invalid inferences as they don’t lead to logically sound
conclusions.

Cons of Invalid Inference

1. Leads to conclusions that aren’t logically justified.

2. Can result in faulty reasoning and incorrect beliefs or actions.
3. Can be used manipulatively to persuade or mislead.

Transitive interference, also known as transitivity, refers to the process of inferring the
relationship between two items based on their relationships with a third item

For example, imagine you meet three people: Alice, Bob, and Carrie. Alice tells you she is friends with
Bob, and Bob tells you he is friends with Carrie.

Through transitive inference, you can deduce that Alice is indirectly friends with Carrie because they
share a mutual friend (Bob). This inference creates new knowledge without providing evidence that Alice
and Carrie are direct acquaintances.
Transitive interference does not only work for relationships between people; it can work for any context
where objects or concepts may have relational links. For instance, if you know that A > B in quality and B
> C in quality, then through transitive inference, we can conclude that A > C in quality. This cognitive
process forms the basis of logical reasoning. It helps individuals make quicker judgments about complex
systems than would be possible if they needed to rely upon direct observations or experiences alone.

Transitive inference is a type of inference that enables individuals to make logical deductions about novel
relationships between items based on their existing relationships with other items through a series of
steps.

It’s an integral part of the hierarchical cognitive system and involves making connections between
previously unknown stimuli via intermediate and related ones.

According to Vasconcelos (2008),

“transitive inference (TI) is the ability to infer unknown relationships between objects by using multiple
sources of information” (Hotta et al., 2015, p. 1).

Transitive interference is assumed to be driven by the fundamental human ability to build numeric and
contextual associations, thus placing stimuli in categories with each other based on degrees of difference
in quality/functionality/valuation. Several studies have proposed underlying neural structures for
transitive interference. One such example includes the recognition of memory tasks that depend upon
the hippocampus, which helps store relevant information and retrieve past experiences from memory
(Zalesak & Heckers, 2009). Additionally, according to Wendelken and Bunge (2010), activity within the
prefrontal cortex plays a role in evaluating whether it is safe to make this leap of logic.

For instance, suppose you are provided with arbitrary symbols A, B, C, and D as well as “training”
whereby A < B and B < C; during testing, you can choose between untrained pairs to determine if they
follow these rules (e.g., A < D?). Overall, transitive interference enables people to derive new knowledge
from prior information and integrate it into their mental models (Markant, 2020).

10 Examples of Transitive Interference

Online Shopping: A practical example could be that a buyer is deciding between two different shoes sold
online: Shoe A is more expensive than Shoe B but has better quality, according to one online review.
Through transitive inference, the customer can assume that all products being sold at the same price
point as Shoe A would also have superior quality.

Restaurant Menus & Ordering Food: When ordering food in a restaurant, a diner may see two sets of
meal combos – Combo #1 includes Steak and Fries, whilst Combo #2 includes Pasta and Garlic Bread. If
an individual likes steak more than pasta and French fries more than garlic bread, then it makes
transitioning easy for them to choose “Combo 1” is preferable over “Combo 2”.
Sports Championships & Ranked Teams: In sports leagues where wins determine who plays who next,
we can determine the winner of the highest-ranking position by critically analyzing how every team did
when going against everyone else.

Relationships/Dating: As humans, when meeting someone new, assumes context about that person from
proxies like common interests or acquaintances. Then, using transitive reasoning, we can infer other
differences/similarities, which become part of the determining factors for continuing any sort of
relationship.

Travel Planning: Similar to restaurants menus previously discussed above, if you’re planning travel
arrangements via train scheduling comparison on a few websites at once – you might realize after some
analysis that trains run on website A are always faster than ones found on site B while taking into
account relative distances traveled or time is taken.

Business Deal-Making: In business negotiations such as mergers and acquisitions (M&A) or partnership
deals, transitive inference comes into play when considering the potential advantages and disadvantages
of specific companies based on market cap or size relative to other similar businesses.

Movie Preferences: If a person enjoys watching action movies with car chase sequences as well as
comedic action films with martial arts fighting sequences, then through transitive inference, they would
enjoy funny stunt videos involving car chases, or mocap fights simulation videos.

Fitness Goals and Workout Routines: If a person attends a gym where one routine focuses heavily on
weights, running fast, etc., and another emphasizes cardio-specific exercises such as jump rope or rowing
machines – they could employ transitive reasoning to conclude that alternating between the two is likely
to be best for achieving long-term goals with high performance/similar levels of exertion.

Product Reviews & Ratings: When reading reviews online and looking to make a purchase, you might
notice that widgets with higher scoring ratings lead you directly toward purchasing that product
compared to lesser-rated alternatives. Likewise, positive ratings gained from testing labs give inputs for
environmental standards and comparative advantages relative to other consumer goods/products.

Health Decisions: Transitive interference can impact health decisions as well. Someone may choose to
eat unhealthy food because it tastes good in the moment, even if they know it is not good for their
overall health.