A brief legal review of inductive reasoning:
In the science of logic, one of the types of reasoning is “inductive reasoning”.
Definition of inductive reasoning:
Inductive reasoning means reasoning through examination and testing of minor matters to reach a general result (general law).
For example, if different types of metals are heated, it is observed that they expand, so we can reach the general conclusion that every metal expands due to heat.
Types of inductive reasoning:
1) Total inductive reasoning:
<
The result of this type of inductive reasoning, in the form of a general verdict, is valid and reliable due to the examination of all the details.
For example, by heating all types of metals and their expansion, let’s rule on the expansion of all metals following heat.
2) incomplete inductive reasoning:
<
The result of this type of inductive reasoning, in the form of a suspicion of a general verdict, is not valid, proof, and certain due to the examination of a limited number of minor cases, and it only causes the prevailing suspicion.
For example, by heating some metals and expanding them, let’s order the expansion of all metals!
In another example, if three of the doctors in a city commit malpractice in their medicine and cause damages to their patients, can we conclude that all the doctors in that city are guilty and are negligent in their medicine and Do patients harm?!!!
Conclusion:
Therefore, the general rulings which are issued by examining some minor cases (not all minor cases!) through incomplete inductive reasoning, are not evidence due to lack of certainty and cannot be cited in the competent courts.
Dr. Peyman Rahmani
7/3/1401
https://t.me/medicallaw_iran
This post is written by Dr_Ali_Habibi