Inductive and Deductive Methods in Science

1. What is the inductive method? What are the difficulties of

inductive generalization? What are the auxiliary methods
of induction? List them. Inductive method is a method or
type of reasoning where one starts from specific instances
to arrive at a general conclusion. Errors in scientific
inductive generalization are not uncommon due to hasty
or hyper-generalization (fallacia fictae universalitatis). Also,
when making a valid conclusion, representative samples
must be used. Auxiliary methods serve to establish the
truth values of propositions, such as counting, measuring,
or experimentation.
2. What is the deductive method in a broader sense, and
what is the deductive method in a narrower sense? What is
an axiomatic system, axiomatic method, and axiomatics?
Deductive method in a broader sense refers to using
deductive reasoning in the process of scientific
investigation. Deductive method in a narrower sense is the
axiomatic method, which involves: establishing or selecting
axioms of a logical or specific scientific system, defining
terms that play the role of basic truths in the system, and
deriving all other statements of the system from the basic
statements, i.e., axioms and definitions of basic logical
statements. Axiomatic systems form the foundation of
entire scientific systems, especially logic and mathematics,
and their disciplines. In an axiomatic system, there are
basic concepts implicitly defined by the axioms of the
system (object, thing, attribute). Axiomatics deals with the
study of axiomatic methods and systems.
3. From what material did Euclid construct his axiomatic
system? What do contemporary axiomatists base their
axiomatic systems on? Euclid constructed his first
 axiomatic system in geometry around 300 BC and also
authored one of the earliest axiomatic presentations of
number theory. Euclid built his axiomatic system from
definitions. Axiomatic systems must be consistent,
independent, and complete.
4. How were axioms and postulates differentiated in the
past? Is that differentiation justified? Are axioms as
understood by modern logic closer to traditional axioms
or postulates? Explain your opinion. Axioms do not require
proof due to their self-evident nature. Postulates can be
defined as axiomatic assumptions, fundamental
hypotheses that are necessary prerequisites leading to
specific solutions. The truth of axioms is self-evident,
whereas postulates are not. The differentiation is not
justified. Axioms are closer to postulates as understood in
modern logic.
5. What are the basic requirements for a set of axioms? Why
is consistency the most important requirement for a set of
axioms? What is the significance of the requirements of
completeness and independence? The basic requirements
are consistency, completeness, and independence.
Consistency implies stability, reliability, and lack of
contradiction. The result of independence is that one
axiom cannot be derived from another axiom.
Completeness adds fullness, accuracy, and
comprehensiveness.