Examples of Deductive, Inductive, Analogical and Enthymematic Argument

Post a link to a web page that you think represents of good example of one of the following: deductive argument, inductive argument, argument by analogy, an enthymeme.  Include a brief explanation of how you see the example working and of where it occurs on the page.  Complete this by the night before class.

27 thoughts on “Examples of Deductive, Inductive, Analogical and Enthymematic Argument”

  1. Throughout this opinion article in the Guardian, author Kira Goldenberg highlights the parallels between the rise of Adolph Hitler and the support that Donald Trump has garnered over the past few months. Too commence this argument, Goldenberg cites specific rhetoric utilized by Jewish leaders, Donald Trump and Adolf Hitler. She says Jewish leaders have recognized, “ ‘all to well the horrors of individuals using hate as a political platform and deploying language, implicit and explicit that tears society apart.’” Goldenberg says this is easily exemplified by Trump’s, “Make America Great Again” slogan which dips into this sense of a re-glorified nation; the exact promise of glory that Hitler used to further his own rise to power. Goldenberg also argues that Trump’s rhetoric is filled with fascist ideology, exactly like that of Hitler’s. In addition, she alludes that Trump’s promise to build a wall or ban certain religions is a clear mirror of Hitler’s Aryan ideology. Finally, she emphasizes that Donald Trump’s rallies are easily compared to those that the Third Reich held in Nazi Germany in the 1930’s.

    Goldenberg’s argument is a good example of an analogy because there is no general principle, but she is able to draw stark comparisons. Goldenberg does a rather good job of pulling specific examples (even though I think she could even go further) and overall presenting her case to her reader. This is a very controversial issue, but I think she sticks to her point and truly conveys the necessary information.

    While, Goldenberg’s argument is a great example of an argument by analogy, I am not personally supportive of this argument. As a Jewish woman, I was always brought up knowing that Hitler was a psychopath and a true anti-Semite. However, Hitler had a plan, known as the Final Solution. Trump spits racial fire, but I am not sure he could actually back it up. Hitler was pure evil and I think Trump just says half of things he does for attention.


  2. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arthur-camins/engineer-schools-for-equity_b_11963608.html?ir=Education

    I think the article above is a good example of an inductive argument. The article discusses how there is inequity and segregation in education and this is intentional. Our education system is designed as Camins says, “engineered” to provide the best form of education to the already wealthy population. Camins mentions that the flow of the water is natural but things like education are structured by humans to be a certain way for specific reasons. He provides various examples of how there is inequity in the education system and ways this could be fixed or changed. Furthermore, this article begins with a sentence that sums up what the article will be about. He states that in the “United States, students have returned to schools that are engineered to be inequitable and segregated”. In other words, he provides a thesis that sums up what the article will bring to surface.

    As I was reading this article, I kept thinking about the Declaration of Independence, and how it lists all the things that King George III did to the people of the colonies. This article mentions how tax is raised for education now and how it should be raised in order to have equity in education. Camins goes on to mention that education differs from neighborhood to neighborhood. At the end, the rich aren’t going to school with the poor. He states that “supporting schools through inequitable local tax revenue rather than progressive income tax is a decision based on goals and values. Federal and state aid to schools do not make up for differences in the tax capacity between states or between local districts. As a nation, this reflects a decision to protect the privilege of the wealthy at the expense everyone else” (Camins).

    Lastly, at the end of the article, he lists the things that could be done in order to ameliorate the education policy and basically reverse what has been going on. This is similar to the last part of the Declaration of Independence where the United States decides to come as one in order to officially declare their inherent rights and privileges. The list at the end of article was written to provide solutions that will lead to a better education policy, which will also promote equity and diversity.

    This article provides an inductive argument because the premises are set for its audience to decide whether the conclusion is believable or unbelievable. The premises are strong enough for me to believe in the claim and therefore I think the conclusion is also true. And an inductive argument allows its audience to evaluate whether the premises are strong enough to support the conclusion. In this case, the author gives examples of how tax money is distributed to educational needs and how it could be distributed in order to promote integration in schools and therefore have a better education system.

  3. Yes, Chemicals In Nail Polish Can Leach Into Your Body: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/nail-polish-chemicals-entering-the-body_us_5627e311e4b02f6a900f59c7

    I believe that this article is a good example of inductive reasoning. The article takes a closer look at a study performed by Duke University and the Environmental Working Group, a public health advocacy organization. The article first introduces the study and then in the third, fourth, and fifth paragraphs provides background information on the “chemical in question” called triphenyl phosphate.

    The article’s sixth paragraph opens with the following statement: “Worrying new correlational studies about the chemical’s potential to disrupt hormones in people and animals are causing scientists and activists to take a fresh look.” The article then continues to inform readers of research findings, with the major study conclusion that “DPHP (triphenyl phosphate’s metabolite) increased sharply in the women who had received nail polish directly on their nails.” Therefore, chemicals in nail polish do absorb into human bodies and can effect their hormones.

    The article then states that while DPHP gets absorbed into bodies following nail polish application and could effect hormones, toxicity is low in humans and that humans tend to only suffer from mild irritation. Those who get their nails done occasionally are unlikely to suffer major consequences. However, it is important to keep in mind the employees of nail salons because they are constantly working with these chemicals and “bear the brunt of their harmful effects in the body.” The article suggests the solution is stricter regulation of cosmetics.

    Throughout the article, links are provided to other supporting articles and governmental websites to provide further supporting evidence and clarification for the readers. Several observations and facts are supported that lead to the conclusion that DPHP does absorb into bodies and that it is important to regulate it especially for the safety of those in contact with these chemicals on a daily basis in the workplace.

  4. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/07/george_zimmerman_and_self_defense_why_it_was_too_easy_for_him_to_get_off.html

    I was in New Orleans when I heard the verdict that George Zimmerman was found not guilty. It was one of the trials in the past few years of violent incidents by police authority to go unpunished. I was eating at a bar when I met a DA Attorney from Texas who said she knew that he was going to be found not guilty by how the trial was going. She said, “the whole case should have been hinged on the fact that Zimmerman should never have gotten out of his car.”

    This article thought back to the trial and provided some other fallacies in the deductive reasoning of the trial. Zimmerman was allowed to execute Martin because he was in self-defense. Also, the article cites that evidence from the fight showed that Zimmerman was losing the fight and did not have an opportunity to escape. This article definitely showed how a different deduction on Zimmerman’s innocence could have been made if you would have sought to explain who picked the fight.

    If the “12 Angry Men,” might have sought the trial I wonder if a Henry Fonda type of character could have brought Zimmerman to a guilty verdict.

  5. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/31/us/politics/donald-trump-khizr-khan-wife-ghazala.html?_r=0

    This link here provides an excellent example of the different categories of deliberative argumentation. A couple of months ago at the Democratic National Convention, Donald Trump criticized the Khan family that Mr. Khan who is a father of a fallen Iraq soldier, delivered the whole speech because his wife Ms. Khan was not allowed to speak. Trump based this argument from maybe hearing about female obedience expected in some traditional strains of Islam, but I think he believes in a stereotype that all women have to follow everything their husbands say. Trump’s argument is a great example of an induction argument because he made this general conclusion from observing or hearing something. As the Deliberative Argumentation reading states, he committed a fallacy of over-generalization and drawing a conclusion of something general instead of it being warranted by the evidence. Since Ms. Khan is Muslim and she has to be obedient, he quickly stated that is why Ms. Khan was silent. Trump did not bother to recognize that this was an emotional speech for the Khan family, and Ms. Khan stated afterwards to the press that she was very emotional and she could not speak because it was too painful. Well, Trump she did speak back about your ridiculous argument and so is she still silent?

  6. The issue of whether we should admit Syrian refugees into the United States and how many, was the topic of an analogy (borrowed from former Illinois Congressman Joe Walsh) made this week by Donald Trump Jr, son of Republican Presidential nominee Donald Trump. In a Twitter post making an argument against refugee admittance, Trump Jr. said, “If I had a bowl of Skittles, and I told you just three would kill you. Would you take a handful? That’s our Syrian refugee problem.” At the bottom of the post, there’s an image of a bowl of skittles. His analogy was meant to convey the great danger inherent with letting in refugees, that one or a few could be terrorists.

    An analogy reasons from one case to another and seeks to show that what is true in one situation also holds true in another similar situation. The skittles analogy falls prey to the typical weakness of analogies, in that, no two situations are ever exact equivalents, which in my opinion, makes it easy to refute. To compare candy to human beings is a not just a gross oversimplification of the refugee problem, but inappropriate and insensitive.


  7. The article below argues that the death penalty can be used as a deterrent for murder…this is a deductive argument. The author writes that if a murderer believed that he would be killed for committing murder, he wouldn’t commit the crime. It is questionable though if this is really true. How can the site make a claim about the state of mind of a sociopath? The article hinges on the fact that the murderer is thinking rationally at the time of the murder but many murderers are acting emotionally or are mentally incompetent. This is an example of a deductive argument not being a rational argument. This laws need to be made by individuals who do not see the world in such black and white terms.

    Here is a link to the article: http://www.law.columbia.edu/law_school/communications/reports/summer06/capitalpunish

  8. Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/28/opinion/28krugman.html

    In a New York Times article entitled “The Third Depression,” Paul Krugman analogizes the Long Depression, Great Depression, and the Great Recession. The article was written in June 2010, during the Great Recession. The author uses examples from the Long Depression and Great Depression and analogizes these historical periods to prove his point that the Great Recession was on its way to be a depression.

    Krugman explains how the Long Depression and Great Depression both had moments of growth. However, these moments were not enough to undo the “initial slump.” He implies that therefore, the Great Recession could indeed be a depression. Further, the author calls attention to the fact that policy makers indeed implemented the lessons of the Great Depression which were helpful, such as lowering interest rates instead of raising them. Krugman even says that officials were using talking points from Herbert Hoover, the President of the United States during the Great Depression.

    This article is surely not unique. There were many opinions and articles during the Great Recession that compared and analyzed what was going on to the Great Depression. In this case, the analogy is being used as an argument that not enough was being done to fix the problems and that if the trajectory continued, what was a Recession would turn into a depression.

  9. “The Lack of Funding Is A Tragedy for Bold Scientific Breakthroughs,” is one of four opinion articles in the New York Times surrounding the issue of corporate-funded scientific research. Written by Richard D. McCullough, the article discusses not of whether corporate funding is ethical but asserts that funding is essential in general for scientific breakthrough. McCullough engages in simple deductive reasoning. However before I explain, it is important to note one implicit premise “There is a tragedy when we do not have the solutions we need.” With that said, his argument goes as follows.

    Implict Premise: There is a tragedy when we do not have the solutions we need.
    Premise 1: Decreased funding hampers bold science
    Premise 2: Hampering bold science jeopardizes the solutions that we need most.
    Conclusion: Therefore decreased funding is a tragedy.

    This is the logic he uses, and if one accepts all of these premises the argument is valid.

    Below is the link of the article.

  10. As soon as you visit https://www.teachforamerica.org/, the headline reads “Where Justice Begins,” with the subtitle, “A just society begins with a great education for all. Today 9% of kids in low income communities will graduate from college. You can change this.” This argument is an example of enthymeme because it omits major premises of the argument needed to draw a logical conclusion. It begins with two claims that the audience can either accept or deny: “A just society begins with a great education for all,” and ” Today 9% of kids in low income communities will graduate from college.” Then, comes the conclusion: “You can change this.”

    The link between the first and second statements is not clear. As a result, the argument places a lot of burden on the audience to assume the premises behind the statements are true. The premise behind the first two statements is that the low college graduation rate of kids from low-income communities is the result of bad elementary, middle, and high schools (or the opposite of “a great education”). Another underlying assumption is: If all people got a great education, then they would go to and graduate from college. Yet another unstated assumption in the conclusion is: By joining Teach For America, “you” can change both the quality of education students get, and the college graduation rates of low-income students. These premises must be stated and challenged before coming to a conclusion. Until then, this argument is an example of enthymeme.

  11. The link to a web page I believes represents a good example of an Enthymeme is the CBS news- Donald Trump Jr. compares Syrian refugees to Skittles – CBS News: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-jr-compares-syrian-refugees-to-skittles/
    This is an example of an Enthymeme, in this message Donald Trump Junior, an adviser to his father the Republican candidate for presidency, tweeted with the caption “The image says it all. Let us end the politically correct agenda that doesn’t put America first.” In the message, he placed a picture of a bowl of skittles and the “Make America Great Again” logo, a sign or indicator of things that can be inferred to logically follow. An Enthymeme is a type of syllogism that contains missing or unstated premises that can be inferred by common sense. Nevertheless, which could become problematic in deliberative issues. In his statement, one has to deduce the effects of eating from bowl of poisoned skittle, and the make America great again analogy in order to elicit the hidden premises. Donald Jr, used this tweet as a subtle means of engaging the emotion and reasoning of the American people against allowing Syrian refugees into the country. He deliberately left out the conclusions after his warning. “If I had a bowl of skittles and I told you just three would kill you, would you take a handful? While he used the vivid picture of a bowl of skittles and make America great again logo to indicate the possibilities of what might result, if these groups of refuges are allowed to come in, he left out the conclusions for the reader to elicit.

  12. http://www.usnews.com/opinion/economic-intelligence/articles/2016-02-11/new-york-should-fight-homelessness-with-support-services-not-just-housing

    In this US News article about homelessness, the author argues that long-term supportive housing is not a cure all nor a solution to city-wide homelessness. He uses analogical argument to highlight the historical ineffectiveness of this practice. Corinth states that “In a research paper, I tested whether cities that expand supportive housing see reduced homeless populations. I found that while more housing slightly reduced homelessness in the short run, the numbers went right back up one year later. ”

    The author also supports his argument that the homelessness problem exceeds housing issues. He cited a study in Canada that found that housing solutions did not decrease addiction or mental illness. This was also a point of deductive argumentation for the author. Corinth reasoned that if homeless results from circumstances such as mental illness and addiction, and those issues are not addressed, homelessness will continue to be a problem.

  13. http://sociology.about.com/od/Sound-Bites-Research-In-the-News/fl/Study-Finds-Racial-and-Gender-Bias-in-Professor-Response-to-Students.htm

    I found this link to be an interesting example of deductive reasoning. The link highlights that deductive reasoning was used to create a hypothesis, that since there was a major occurrence of racism in the general society, then race would automatically contribute or play a part in influencing the manner in which professors responded to prospective graduate students.

    The article points to the study (deductive reasoning) which was conducted by professors Katherine L. Milkman, Modupe Akinoa and Dolly Chugh and published in the Social Science Resarch Network and measured over 6000 professors from 250 of the top schools nationwide. The study found that racial minorities were far less likely to receive responses from professors regardless of the professor’s race or gender. Key findings indicated that Asian students experienced the most bias, and that gender and racial diversity among faculty did not reduce discrimination. The researchers noted that there was greater discrimination at private schools, and amongst the natural sciences and business school. It was also noted that overwhelmingly, as faculty pay increased so too did the incidences of discrimination.

    This was done be tracking the responses and the lack of response given to fake students whose race and gender were coded, and allowed the researches to prove this hypothesis true. In the end it we proven that racial and gender biases were indeed barriers and that they served to prevent equality in terms of access to graduate studies across the United States.

  14. http://fortune.com/2015/09/08/germany-migrant-crisis/

    The migrant crisis may be a hot topic in the US, but there is an ocean that separates the country from what is going on in Europe over the last 2 years. Migrants from Syria, who are escaping a war zone and walking across a continent for safety were last year, looking to settle in Western Europe. Many countries in the region have strong social service and facing a wave of millions, Germany volunteered to accept those who could make it. With the stream of migrants seeming endless, citizens have grown concerned for what this means for their home country. The article above gently explains some of the positive benefit that Germany stands to gain. The argument style is inductive.
    The writer points out that Germany is a”rapidly aging and shrinking population… With one of the world’s lowest birthrates” and there are over 6 million foreigners in Germany right now who contribute steadily to the economy and pay taxes. Therefore, the addition of new workers should be considered a welcomed advantage. However, the author notes, that new immigrants tend to be unskilled and do not speak german language. The sort of back tracking allows for both sides of the argument to be covered. If in the long term migrants prove to be a positive addition to Europe economy, the author will be right. If the opposite holds true, the author never promised anything.

  15. This article from The Guardian cites a report released by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), which is a great example of a deductive argument. This article highlights the findings of the EPI report which concluded that the wage gap between black and white workers is much higher today than it was in 1979. The report blamed the worsening black-white wage gap on the effects of job market discrimination and rising inequality in general, which policies have failed to ameliorate. Researchers analyzed various black-white wage gap patterns since 1979. For example, blacks and whites with the same education levels and work experience have been disproportionately compensated. The Guardian article states, “According to the EPI, black male college graduates started the 1980s with less than 10% disadvantage relative to white male college graduates but by 2014 similarly educated new entrants were at a roughly 18% disadvantage… At the beginning of the 1980s, black women with a college degree or higher and white women with a college degree or higher earned roughly the same wages. But today, wages for black women with a college degree or higher are 12.3% less than those of their white counterparts.” Even after adjusting for factors such as “education, experience and region of residence” the racial wage gap was still evident. Valerie Wilson, an author of the report said it best “The finding that stands out the most, our major result, is that the racial wage gaps were larger in 2015 than they were in 1979. That’s huge because the impression people have, in general, is we know there’s still racism in this country, but we think or at least believe that it’s getting better.”


  16. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/21/opinion/campaign-stops/clintons-samantha-bee-problem.html?_r=0

    I chose this opinion piece because I had a very strong emotional response as I was reading it. The author makes the argument that the “cultural industry” has such an intensely leftist “agenda” that it has forced Hillary Clinton and the democrats to move far on the left as well. He chooses to illustrate his point by basically saying that the “cultural industry” – examples of which include: late night TV/comedy shows, awards shows, colleges and universities, and even ESPN, NBA, NCAA…etc – is making clear gains by pushing the “gay and transgender” as well as the Black Lives Matter agenda. It’s incredible to me that universities and cultural institutions that strive to create inclusive and tolerant atmospheres are considered to be espousing some anti-conservative “agenda”. Rather than taking all of these actions as an attack on conservatism, the author would do well to actually evaluate what these so-called agendas actually call for. Being anti-racist and anti-discrimination is not being anti-rightist/Republican.

    I believe the argument the author makes is inductive, but very faulty at that. He doesn’t present any evidence for his argument that late night TV is leftist, nor about how universities are “increasingly acting as indoctrinators for that same agenda, shifting their already-lefty consensus under activist pressure.” He also has not presented any evidence about which of Hillary Clinton’s policies have shifted to the left as a result of all these leftist cultural conditions. Mr. Douthat’s arguments are simply made up based on his own preconceived notions and not supported on any real evidence beyond his own perception of reality.

  17. http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2016/01/20/should-college-be-free/the-problem-is-that-free-college-isnt-free

    The problem is that Free College isn’t free:
    While trying to find a nice article that shows deductive reasoning (my favorite so far), I found the article in the link above quite interesting! In this article, Andrew starts his argumentation by indicating what his main statement is. He provides a general, but overarching argument of the argument at hand. He then proceeds to write out the reasons why college aide is not really free to taxpayers and others in general. He is also able to provide solid examples on how college expenses would increase the number of new students. This would saturate the eductation fund and reduce funds from those that needed it the most. It was easier to notice how there was an intended structure to the argument. For example, the author in a way lists the arguments in order, which in a way was kind of strange given that there was no specific mention of “first”, “second” and “third”. I also liked the way the author provided details on base years for comparisons and statistics which would increase credibility in the argument put forward. He then in a way rephrases the initial statement in the conclusion, just so as to remind the reader what the issue is and how it can be completed.

  18. Martin Luther King “ I have a dream speech,” rated as one of the best speeches of all time, is an example of deductive reasoning. In the speech, he argued against the many injustices people of color had endured and continued to endure from the moment they arrived on the shores of the United States in the 1600s. His argument was based on premises derived from the Declaration of Independence, which states that⎯ all men are created equal, endowed with inalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness:

    All men are created equal, endowed with inalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness

    Black men (possessing all features and characteristics of man) are men

    Therefore, black men should be accorded the same inalienable rights of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness like all other men

    Below is the link to the speech.


  19. Entitled “Gonorrhea is more dangerous than ever as resistance to antibiotics grows” the following article highlights the growing resistance of the newest strain of Gonorrhea to antibiotics. The argument type used in this case is an inductive one. Evidence is provided through research and testing of cases showing the disease can be resistant to the newest “last resort” antibiotics.Evidence is provided through officials and experts on the issue. The article also goes stays true to its claim that the disease is more dangerous than ever but does provide information stating that officials are testing new drugs that may be able to cure the diseases resistance in the future . It also states that in one study done , the very resistant strain was able to be treated with current drugs. Still the strongest point is that the most affordable and widely available drugs are may become useless as disease grows stronger .


  20. Link: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/did-giuliani-really-clean-up-times-square/

    The article “Did Giuliani Really Clean Up New York?” by CBSNEWS talks about the transformation of Times square. Nowadays it is a family-friendly tourist area where thousands of tourists are walking every day. However, not many years ago Times Square was one of the most dangerous places in the city. The article mentions that the most credit seems to be given to Rudolph Giuliani who was elected the 107th mayor of New York City in 1994. Giuliani said during one of his speeches, – “It’s called getting things done,”. Even Giuliani’s critics give him credit for cleaning up the city from crime.

    The article later on brings up some evidence to show that Giuliani should not be the sole individual who is thanked for making New York a safer place. Before Giuliani came to the office many other agencies were already involved in development of strategies for improving the city. Ethel Sheffer, an urban planning expert has noted that state agencies had plans for developing New York and that it takes time for changes to unfold.

    To my understanding the premise that Giuliani made Times Square a safer place is an example of enthymeme. Enthymeme is an argument when the logic of deliberation depends on understood principles but are left unsaid. Sometime not all of these principles can be safe. For example, when Giuliani is given a credit for improving New York, the others are ignored. Also there is a question that needs to be asked such as what had happened to those who were located in Times Square. The former Councilman Thomas Duane stated that Giuliani isolated them mostly to the “industrial waterfront” areas of the city.  

  21. http://www.nyclu.org/issues/racial-justice/stop-and-frisk-practices

    I believe tis article that analysis stop and frisk and the civil liberties of those most effected is an inductive argument because the conclusion and recommendations to help fix the issue is based off of research. The research has proven that stop and frisk has not only infringe on the ciliv liberties of citizens int he United States but also specially target men of color – Black and Latino. 9 to 10 people who are stopped during stop and frisk are innocent. The article goes on to point out these important facts:

    1.No research has ever proven the effectiveness of New York City’s stop-and-frisk regime, and the small number of arrests, summonses, and guns recovered demonstrates that the practice is ineffective.

    2. Many thought because of stop and frisk during Bloomberg that he was responsible for the murder rate towrope nearly in half and that this was an effective practice but this is not the case as the article states: The murder drop happened before Bloomberg took office and before the explosion in stop-and-frisk.

    3. Guns are found in less than 0.2 percent of stops. That is an unbelievably poor yield rate for such an intrusive, wasteful and humiliating police action.

  22. This article which was very recently posted due to a statement made by Donald Trump Jr on twitter has what will be termed as an Analogy. In his twitter statement he compared Syrian refugees to a bowl of skittles. He posted on the page very colorful skittles in a white bowl on a white background. He states “”This image says it all,” “Let’s end the politically correct agenda that doesn’t put America first.” What makes his statement and the picture of the bowl of skittles interesting is the fact that the owner of that picture was a refugee who is now a British Citizen. Now the talk could take a turn to copyright infringement.


  23. *A content warning for my fellow classmates: This article and the discussion to follow revolves around police violence.*

    Also, I’m posting two articles, which demonstrate both inductive and deductive reasoning.



    Two days ago in Charlotte, North Carolina, a black man, Keith Lamont Scott, was fatally shot by police. This event was preceded by the tragic killing of Terence Crutcher, another black man, whose car had stalled in the middle of a road in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Instead of receiving aid for this broken-down vehicle, Crutcher was first tasered by one officer and then, seconds later, shot dead by another officer. Crutcher was unarmed.

    Both incidents are symbolic of a broader issue of police killings, many of which go unaccounted for, that have seem to become commonplace in our country. I’ve been thinking of communities who suffer directly from police brutality, as well as people who can empathize with those victims, as a simmering pot of soup, which, when unchecked, bubbles over. Literally hours after the murder of Scott, people took to the streets to, once again, vent their brimming frustration with a system that has ceaselessly failed them in every aspect of our society.

    But, it seems, with almost every highly publicized case that involves the death of a black man or woman at the hands of law enforcement, much of the public and the media conjure multiple interpretations of what allegedly occurred. Whether we’re aware of it or not, our own perceptions of such events as police killings are shaped by our capacity to utilize deductive and inductive reasoning. Beyond that, the reasoning itself may be subjective based on people’s distinct life experiences.

    As such, both the cases of Keith Lamont Scott and Terence Crutcher have prompted many to critique the series of events that culminated in their deaths. Regarding Scott, the police claimed him to have been armed. Likewise, Crutcher, according to Tulsa police, was in possession of PCP, an illegal and highly potent drug.

    In these scenarios, both inductive and deductive reasoning are at play here and in different, perhaps opposing, ways. On the one hand, one may use their deductive reasoning to justify the killings based on the claims of police. For instance, if this individual had a propensity to believe most of what was told to them at face value, then they would likely assume both Crutcher and Scott (drugged and armed, respectively) posed an imminent danger to the police officers on the scene: because of the volatile and potentially fatal circumstances for officers, their deaths were inevitable, if not justified.

    One’s inductive reasoning, however, may tell a different story. It is a known fact that police have, in several past incidences, “planted” evidence on victims of police killings, usually drugs or weapons. Let’s say another individual examined the deaths of Scott and Crutcher and, perhaps, they’re more informed of police conduct and, therefore, critical of deaths at the hands of law enforcement. Inductive reasoning may be used such that prior cases of police killings have led this individual to believe the claims of the families of the victims; Crutcher wasn’t a druggie and Scott, on his way to pick up his child, possessed a book, not a firearm.

  24. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/21/nyregion/racial-segregation-in-new-york-schools-begins-in-pre-k-report-finds.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fnyregion&action=click&contentCollection=nyregion&region=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=10&pgtype=sectionfront

    The article that I read shows an example of an inductive argument. The clear conclusion derived throughout the article is about how NYC has a major segregation issue in prekindergarten. This article was supported by the findings in a report that was done by the Century Foundation. The Century Foundation is a public policy research group. This report found that in half of all of the pre-K classes over 70% of the students belonged to a single racial or ethnical group. “In one out of every six pre-K classrooms, more than 90 percent of the students were of the same race or ethnicity. The fact that this segregation starts in kindergarten based on the derived result of the analysis suggests that children are not interacting with other races which causes gaps in equality .

    The article discussed the issue and observed how segregation in pre-K came to be. One finding was that 60% pre-K students from the year the report was conducted, 2013-2014, were enrolled at community-based organizations, and those classrooms tended to be more racially homogeneous than public ones. This article shows induction and such examples all throughout the article.

  25. http://money.cnn.com/2016/09/15/news/economy/elizabeth-warren-fbi-wall-street/

    This quote defines Senator Elizabeth Warren’s speech very well “’If Secretary Clinton’s email server was of sufficient ‘interest’ to establish a new FBI standard of transparency, then surely the criminal prosecution of those responsible for the 2008 financial crisis should be subject to the same level of transparency,’ Warren wrote in a letter to law enforcement officials on Thursday.” This quote is also a good example of a deductive-conditional argument. A deductive argument is where a premise and a conclusion is present. A conditional type is when ‘if… and then…’ are used in a sentence. If her emails were able to catch the attention of the FBI, then the people who were responsible for the financial crisis in 2008 should have caught the attention of the FBI.

  26. http://www.metro.us/news/the-secret-behind-trump-s-speeches-enthymemes/zsJpbp—k23oPANSeO2/

    Politicians and advertisers make great use of enthymemes. The idea is that an argument is considered so obviously true that the missing premise is not even with mentioning. One presidential candidate this year, Donald Trump, uses this method effectively to silence his political opponents and/or the media. In the article link above, he makes reference to Carly Fiorina, one of his competitors in the party primary elections and says, “Look at that face. Would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next president?” There is no connection made between Carly Fiorina’s face and the public voting, or not voting for her. The two statements are unrelated without premises to tie them together. He leaves the opening for listeners to fill in the blanks with assumptions of what he intends to say – without saying it.

    It is an effective way of communicating with an audience without logically tying sentences together. If the audience can make any correlation, even unsubstantiated, then there is a possibility of getting them to agree with the innuendo being promulgated.

Comments are closed.