Critical Study on Classification of Deduction and Induction (연역과 귀납의 분류 - 논증론에서 연역/귀납 분류법의 지위)

Hong, Kyung-Nam (홍경남)

doi:10.33156/philos.2012.31..007

Critical Study on Classification of Deduction and Induction

Philosophical Investigation
2012, 31(), pp.181~231
DOI : 10.33156/philos.2012.31..007
Publisher : Institute of philosophy in Chung-Ang Univ.
Research Area : Humanities > Philosophy

Hong, Kyung-Nam ¹

¹중앙대학교

Accredited

ABSTRACT

We have frequently taken deduction/induction dichotomy with our education of logic, but any plausible reasons for such taking were not given. There are three requirements of reasonable argument classification, such as evaluative openness, exhaustive exclusiveness, and evaluative effectiveness, and two accounts for the deduction/induction dichotomy based on psychology and achievement, which do not satisfy one or two of those requirements. Trials were made to solve problems related to the classification by selecting any one of the two methods, such as deductivism, inductivism, and modified inductivism. Such trials turned out to be failed, and so, eliminativism that eliminates the deduction / induction classification from the start is tested. With the testing of the eliminativism is it noted that argument analysis and argument evaluation should not be regarded as completely separated projects. In case we understand the contextual interaction of the argument analysis and the argument evaluation, the adoption of the post-evaluative deduction / induction classification can avoid or solve the argument dichotomy- related problems. And it is claimed that the pluralistic argument classification, not the monistic or the dualistic, should be rightly granted, at which we as theorists of argument should aim.

KEYWORDS

Deduction, Induction, Argument Classification, Deductivism, Inductivism, Pluralism

Citation status

* References for papers published after 2023 are currently being built.

[journal] 김광수 / 2002 / ATheory on Critical Thinking / 철학연구 / 철학연구회 58 : 5~42

[journal] 박준호 / 2006 / Kind of Arguments and Some Criteria of Argument Evaluation: What can we learn from critical thinking and informal logic? / 범한철학 / 범한철학회 42(3) : 273~296

[journal] 하병학 / 2002 / Critical Thinking and Argument Theory for The Interdisciplinary Studies / 철학연구 / 철학연구회 58 : 61~74

[journal] Bowles, George / 1994 / The Deductive/Inductive Distinction / Informal Logic 16(3) : 159~184

[book] Copi, Irving / 1998 / Introduction to Logic, Upper Saddle River / Prentice-Hall

[journal] Ennis, Robert, H / 2001 / Argument Appraisal Strategy: A Comprehensive Approach / Informal Logic 21(2) : 97~140

[book] Fisher, Alec / 2001 / Critical Thinking: An Introduction / Cambridge Univ. Press

[book] Fisher, Alec / 1995 / A Continuum of Inferences, In Modern Epistemology / McGraw-Hill : 164~178

[journal] Fohr, Samuel, D. / 1979 / The Deductive-Inductive Distinction / Informal Logic 2(2) : 5~8

[journal] Fohr, Samuel, D / 1980 / Deductive-Inductive: Reply to Criticisms / Informal Logic 3(1) : 5~10

[journal] Godden, David M / 2005 / Deductivism as an Interpretive Strategy: A Reply to Groarke's Recent Defense of Reconstructive Deductivism / Argumentation and Advocacy 41(3) : 168~183

[journal] Goddu, G. C / 2001 / The 'Most Important and Fundamental' Distinction in Logic / Informal Logic 22(1) : 1~17

[journal] Govier, Trudy / 1978 / Alternative to Inductive-Deductive Paradigm / Informal Logic 1(2) : 4~

[journal] Govier, Trudy / 1979 / Challenge and Response: Carl Wellman / Informal Logic 2(2) : 10~15

[journal] Govier, Trudy / 1979 / More on Deductive and Inductive Arguments / Informal Logic 2(3) : 7~8

[journal] Govier, Trudy / 1980 / Assessing Arguments: What Range of Standards / Informal Logic 3(1) : 2~4

[book] Govier, Trudy / 1987 / Problems in Argument Analysis and Evaluation / Foris

[book] Govier, Trudy / 1999 / The Philosophy of Argument / Vale Press

[book] Govier, Trudy / 2005 / A Practical Study of Argument / Wadsworth

[journal] Groarke, Leo / 1999 / Deductivism Within Pragma-Dialectics / Argumentation 13 : 1~16

[journal] Hitchcock, David / 1979 / Deductive and Inductive: Types of Validity, Not Types of Arguments / Informal Logic 2(3) : 9~10

[journal] Hitchcock, David / 1980 / Deduction, Induction and Conduction / Informal Logic 3(2) : 7~15

[book] Johnson, Ralph, H / 2000 / Manifest Rationality: A Pragmatic Theory of Argument / Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc

[book] Rescher, Nicholas / 1964 / An Introduction to Logic / St. Martin's Press

[journal] Vorobej, Mark / 1992 / Defining Deduction / Informal Logic 14(2&3) : 105~118

[journal] Weddle, Perry / 1979 / Inductive, Deductive / Informal Logic 2(1) : 1~5

[journal] Weddle, Perry / 1980 / Good Grief; More on Deduction/Induction / Informal Logic 3(1) : 10~13

[journal] Wilbanks, Jan J / 2010 / Defining Deduction, Induction, and Validity / Argumentation 24 : 107~124

KJCKorea
Journal Central

Philosophical Investigation 2023 KCI Impact Factor : 0.41

Critical Study on Classification of Deduction and Induction

ABSTRACT

KEYWORDS

Citation status

* References for papers published after 2023 are currently being built.

Philosophical Investigation 2023 KCI Impact Factor : 0.41

Critical Study on Classification of Deduction and Induction

ABSTRACT

KEYWORDS

Statistics

Tools

Issue List

Citation status

KCI Citation Counts (11)

REFERENCES (28) * References for papers published after 2023 are currently being built.

Search PDF

Citation

* References for papers published after 2023 are currently being built.