Deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning are methods of making inferences, used in

developing statements about some mathematical concepts or phenomena. Figure 1 below

illustrates the distinction between the two processes.

General Principle
Specific Statement
Pattern Pattern
Specific
Statement General Statement

Figure 1. Deductive and inductive Reasoning

Consider the following arguments:

Argument 1: The sum of two odd integers is an even number.

m and n are odd integers.

Thus, m + n is even.

Argument 2: 3+5 = 8, 7+11 = 18, and 9+21 = 30.

Therefore, the sum of two odd integers is even.

In Argument 1, the first two statements are the premises of the argument while
the third statement is the conclusion. Argument 1 uses the deductive form of reasoning in
drawing a specific statement (conclusion) from a general principle (premise, known to be
valid and true). This method of reasoning ensures the truth of the conclusion provided that
the premises are true. In other words, if the premises are true, there is no way that the
conclusion is false.

In Argument 2, the first statement is the premise while the second is the
conclusion. Argument 2 uses the inductive reasoning. As can be observed, the premise (or
premises) consists of specific cases while the conclusion is just a generalization of what is
claimed in the premise. Unlike in the deductive process, the premises in the inductive
process can only strengthen the truth of the conclusion but do not guarantee the truth of
the conclusion.
 In mathematics, theorems generally take the deductive approach like those you
encountered in Geometry. Conclusions are usually inferred following the citation of
definitions, related theorem or mathematical rule.

Example 1

Consider the following statements:

In a right triangle, the two acute angles are complementary.

Triangle ABC has B = 90˚

Therefore, A + C = 90˚

Here, the first premise is a known property of right triangles. The next statement
actually implies that triangle ABC is a right triangle (invoking the definition of right
triangle) with angles A and C being acute. This follows from the property that the sum of
interior angles must be 180˚, and angle A is already 90˚. Thus, the conclusion is definitely
true and the argument is valid.

On the other hand, statements that are derived through experimentation take the
inductive reasoning. Statistical researches, for example, rely heavily on the investigation
of a sample group, which is just a subset of the entire population, and the level of
significance somehow quantities the degree that the inferred conclusion is true.

One classic example of inductive inference is Galileo’s characterization of the

pendulums that led to the development of pendulum clocks. Briefly put, he showed that
time it takes for a pendulum to take one full swing (called period) is dependent on the
length of the pendulum. In particular, the period is the square root of length. The
establishment of this property was not solely inductive. It took a while for the deductive
approach to be applied before the conclusion was accepted as an absolute truth.

In as much as patterned are concerned, there is another way of looking at how

deductive and inductive approaches of reasoning differ. Deductive reasoning, for
example, can be applied to algebraic expression.

Example2

Consider the following series of operations: Multiply your

age by 8, add 6 to the result, then divide the sum by 2, and finally subtract 3 from the
quotient. Note that the series of operations generates 4 times your age.
 Now, represent the age by a variable x with the first operation resulting in 8x. The
8𝑥+6
second operation gives 2 . Using algebra, this value can be simplified into 4x +3.
Performing the last operation yields
4x + 3 – 3 = 4x

This indicates that the given series of operations is actually equivalent to simply
multiplying your age by 4.

In the inductive approach, simply observe few cases instead of assigning the
variable x for the age. For example, if your age is 7, then the series of operations yields
the following values:

8 x 7 = 56

56 + 6 = 62

62 / 2 = 31

31 – 3 = 28

A person aged 12 years will generate the following values:

8 X 12 = 96

96 + 6 = 102

102 / 2 = 51

51 – 3 = 48

Likewise, a 35-year old person will have the following values:

8 x 35 =280

280 + 6 = 286

286 ÷ 2 = 143

143 – 3 = 140

Observing the results, one may conclude that the series of operations corresponds to
multiplying the age by 4. So, while the results are the same using both deductive and inductive
approaches, the process of making inferences clearly differs in the two cases. Again, as a matter
of emphasis, inferences made by inductive process do not render absolute truth (only
conjecture). They can be proven to be true using the deductive approach.

This process is applied to establish mathematical truths. One starts by observing patterns
of events, generalizing the pattern by a formula or mathematical rule (forming a conjecture ),
then proving the conjecture by deductive process.

For example, a conjecture that “if the sum of two natural numbers is even, then
their product is also even” can be made by observing that 2 + 4 = 6 and 2 x 4 =8 or 4 +10 =14 and
4x 10 = 40.This conjecture is not an absolute truth as in the case 3 + 5 = 8 ( an even ) but 3 x 5
=15 ( an odd ). A statement or an example that disproves the conjecture is a counter example.
Only a single counterexample is needed to disprove a conjecture.

Example 3

The statement that “any real number divided by itself is the number

1” is incorrect.

Zero is a real number, yet 0/0 is undefined ( or not a real number ).

Thus, the second statement is a counterexample.