Reasoning about arguments in which the conclusion cannot be false if the premises are true. See also inductive reasoning.

Proving statements by reasoning from accepted postulates, definitions, theorems, and given information.

making specific observations from a generalization

The analytic process used to move from generalizations to structurally certain conclusions.

reasoning from the general to the particular (or from cause to effect)

a reasoning that proceeds from the general to the specific

A form of logical thinking to analyze when one is asked to evaluate the persuasive devices used by the author. In deductive reasoning, general statements (major premises) believed to be true are applied to specific situations (minor premises). The result of deduction is a conclusion about a specific situation. This three step pattern is called a syllogism. example- "All hard and green apples are sour, this apple is hard and green, therefore this apple is sour." Thomas Huxley "The Method of Scientific Experiment"

inductive reasoning moves from observation of specific circumstances and makes a general conclusion; deductive reasoning takes a general truth and applies it to specific circumstances

A valid argument in which the conclusion follows from the premises.

Method of reasoning that connects a general premise (or accepted truth) with a smaller premise to draw a conclusion based on the connection.

A system of reasoning based on definitions and premises.

Deductive reasoning is taking a known idea or theory and applying it to a situation (often with the intention of testing whether it is true). It is based on the process of elimination, logical steps and analysis.

is logic that moves from the general to the specific.

Using known fact to draw a conclusion about a specific situation.

reasoning from facts that are known or supposed to be true, to other facts that necessarily follow from them.

drawing conclusions based on global information; whole to part analysis

The type of thinking that involves making specific conclusions from general examples£®Also called Cause and Effect

Using logic to arrive at a specific conclusion based on a generalization or premise. It goes from the general to the specific. Compare inductive reasoning.

Reasoning in which one tries to determine whether some statement follows logically from certain premises, as in the analysis of syllogisms. This is in contrast with inductive reasoning in which one observes a number of particular instances and tries to determine a general rule that covers them all.

A type of reasoning wherein the conclusion about particulars follows necessarily from general or universal premises. (W)

The process of reasoning from statements accepted as true to reach a conclusion.

In traditional Aristotelian logic, deductive reasoning is inference in which the conclusion is of lesser or equal generality than the premises, as opposed to inductive reasoning, where the conclusion is of greater generality than the premises. Other theories of logic define deductive reasoning as inference in which the conclusion is just as certain as the premises, as opposed to inductive reasoning, where the conclusion can have less certainty than the premises. In both approaches, the conclusion of a deductive inference is necessitated by the premises: the premises can't be true while the conclusion is false. (In Aristotelian logic, the premises in inductive reasoning can also be related in this way to the conclusion.)

Logical reasoning pattern where the conclusion follows from the premises

Reasoning from a general concept or theory to a specific prediction. For example, knowing the general laws of gravity, and having mathematical equations for them, allows us to deduce or make specific predictions about the path of a satellite.

A series of logical steps in which a conclusion is drawn directly from a set of statements that are known or assumed to be true.

Using logic to arrive at a conclusion from a given premise.

Deductive reasoning is the kind of reasoning in which the conclusion is necessitated by, or reached from, previously known facts (the premises). If the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. This is distinguished from abductive and inductive reasoning, where the premises may predict a high probability of the conclusion, but do not ensure that the conclusion is true.