Methods of Reasoning in Scientific Discovery

Authors

  • G. Nandasena Lecturer, Department of Mathematics and Philosophy of Engineering, Faculty of Engineering Technology, The Open University of Sri Lanka, Nawala, Nugegoda, 10250. Sri Lanka
  • L. N. K. de Silva Former Dean of the Faculty of Natural Science in the University of Kelaniya, 109/1, Railway Avenue, Maharagama, 10280. Sri Lanka
  • K. K. W. A. S. Kumara Senior Lecturer, Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Applied science, University of Sri Jayewardenepura, Gangodawilla, Nugegoda 10250. Sri Lanka

Keywords:

General Statement, Statistical generalization, Inductive Generalization, Induction, Deduction and Abduction.

Abstract

In this paper, we briefly discuss the forms of arguments and the methods of reasoning in scientific experiments, namely, inductive reasoning, abductive reasoning and deductive reasoning. We find that generalization is in human nature, and it is only a conception without any perception. The short comings of the applications of deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning are analyzed using examples. It is observed that deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning methods are invalid in scientific reasoning. We discuss the vulnerability of the foundation of science that is based on the methods of inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning. We find that it is by abductive reasoning that theories are constructed to explain empirical observations. Abductive reasoning is only the reasoning method that can be applied for the observations in the empirical world. Finally, we conclude that the best and the most effective method of reasoning is the abductive reasoning for scientific experiments.

References

[1] Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia [Internet]. Francis Bacon [updated 2017 June 17; cited 2017 June 20]. Available from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Bacon
[2] Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia [Internet]. Charles Sanders Peirce [updated 2017 May 20; cited 2017 May 23]. Available from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Sanders_Peirce
[3] G. Nandasena, L. N. K. de Silva, K. K. W. A. S. and Kumara, “Basic Rules of Aristotelian logic and Induction”. American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2017) Vol 29, No 1, pp 263-270.
[4] G. S. Stephen. Logic and Mathematics. [Lecture notes on internet]. Pennsylvania: State University; Department of mathematics; 2000 [2015 Dec 26]. Available from: http://www.personal.psu.edu/t20/papers/philmath.pdf.
[5] G. Hardegree. Symbolic Logic, A First Course [Lecture notes on internet]. McGraw-Hill College; 1999 [cited 2015 Dec 26]. Available from: http://courses.umass.edu/phil110-gmh/MAIN/IHome-5.htm
[6] N. John, R. Dennis and V. Achille. Shaum's Outline of Theory and Problems of Logic. 2nd ed. Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited; 2004.
[7] G. Nandasena, L. N. K. de Silva, K. K. W. A. S. and Kumara, “n-Fold m-Valued Logic”. American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2017) Vol 30, No 1, pp 372-384.

Downloads

Published

2018-01-06

How to Cite

Nandasena, G., K. de Silva, L. N., & S. Kumara, K. K. W. A. (2018). Methods of Reasoning in Scientific Discovery. American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences, 39(1), 1–9. Retrieved from https://asrjetsjournal.org/index.php/American_Scientific_Journal/article/view/3500

Issue

Section

Articles