1. In your own words, explain the difference between deductive and inductive logic

The main difference between deductive and inductive logic is the method that is used to determine information and knowledge. Inductive reasoning is heavily reliant on experimentations where you will need to ensure that all successive trials follow a shared rule. An example ofÂ where inductive reasoning has come to play is the act of dropping a pen. After dropping a pen multiple times, we have been able to identify that “if a pen drops, it will always fall” (of course, this is due to the force of gravity) through inductive reasoning.

Deductive reasoning is when you have a statement that identifies and classifies a certain thing. Any subsequent things under the same classification will then have the same traits and conclusion. An example is: “All men are mortal. Jake is a man, therefore Jake is a mortal”.

1. What are the problems with each of these kinds of logic and what we can do to overcome some of these problems

The problems with these kinds of logic is that the circumstances and conditions can be unreliable yet conclusions can still be made. A lack of solid evidence backing up ones judgement could lead to flawed reasoning or judgements. An example could be, someone without sufficient knowledge or experience in a certain field will be unable to provide reliable reasoning or statements. As for deductive reasoning, the entire accuracy of it could be in question. Deductive reasoning utilises specific rules to determine the attributes of something else that falls under the same class. The issue for this is that these rules are not usually concrete and are often flawed. One other thing to note is that deductive reasoning and judgements are derived from rules established from inductive reasoning, making more room for error if the inductive reasoning is inaccurate.