people need to stop whining about this its not something that people literally take step by step. it is a way to show the thought process to prove or disprove something. once you've got everything and you want to present it to the greater scientific community then you better start writing up your scientific method, but since you're on a forum for an online gaming website i'm going to assume you're not quite that far yet.
Well, science is always inferior to deductive reasoning, where you take premises p, and get q. Science IS very useful if you want to disprove p. If p implies q, but not q, then not p. So I suppose using this method, then you can uncover many facts about p, but a great deal of science is based of of inductive data, which is not as rigorous as deductive logic / mathematics; thus, when you can use the latter, it is preferable.
Well, science is always inferior to deductive reasoning, where you take premises p, and get q. Science IS very useful if you want to disprove p. If p implies q, but not q, then not p. So I suppose using this method, then you can uncover many facts about p, but a great deal of science is based of of inductive data, which is not as rigorous as deductive logic / mathematics; thus, when you can use the latter, it is preferable.
Deductive reasoning is part of the process used by science. Inductive reasoning is just the first step in the process.
Deductive reasoning is part of the process used by science. Inductive reasoning is just the first step in the process.
One should only use science if it cannot be explained through deductive reasoning. The inductive reasoning aspect in science will keep an idea derived from it a theory, whereas with deductive reasoning, one can know for certain that the idea is certain if the premises are true. This is why I prefer using deductive reasoning rather than inductive reasoning when debating evolution, for example. And it further backs up what we have observed scientifically.
One should only use science if it cannot be explained through deductive reasoning. The inductive reasoning aspect in science will keep an idea derived from it a theory, whereas with deductive reasoning, one can know for certain that the idea is certain if the premises are true. This is why I prefer using deductive reasoning rather than inductive reasoning when debating evolution, for example. And it further backs up what we have observed scientifically.
Inductive reasoning is use in forming a hypothesis, deductive reasoning is used in making predictions from the hypothesis or theory. Deductive reasoning is not separate from the scientific method it's used as part of the process.
we follow the scientific method every day, even if we never even heard of the scientific method! it's what life does... If you miss the bus after school you automatically think of reasons to get back home, like today, i walked.
Deductive reasoning was what the ancient greeks used, and they thought earth was the center of the universe.
Not necessarily related. And you're implying that because of deductive reasoning, they thought that the Earth was the center of the universe. Similar argument (parody): Before women got the right to vote, there were no nuclear weapons.
Deductive reasoning is rigorous, and it's really the only acceptable form of reasoning. Everything else has an air of uncertainty about it.
If you miss the bus after school you automatically think of reasons to get back home, like today, i walked.
Sure, it seems like the logical thing to do, but how is this example related to the scientific method?
