Deductive Reasoning Is Reliable

Reason is applying logic, to constitute and validate factual claims, stemming from new and existing information. Scientific knowledge can be acquired through the most conventional forms such as inductive and deductive reasoning. It is deemed reliable when predictions are faultless, leading to credible scientific knowledge with consistency and repeatability. Reliability is that relevant results must be intrinsically repeatable, resulting in a logical true conclusion. Although using reason as a way of obtaining information is used often, there are limitations that make this way of knowing not as reliable as we think it is. This essay thus aims to explore the reliability in both inductive and deductive reasoning in constructing scientific knowledge.

It builds upon preceding information, uses all of the facts obtainable to come up with a suitable hypothesis. It is reliable as it examines the testability of a theory and guarantees that the premises provide support for the conclusions. For example, the first observation Isaac Newton made before discovering the Law of Universal Gravitation was the apple that fell from a tree. His insight was that the force of gravity might not reach the orbit of the Moon if the force of gravity hits the top of the highest tree. He conducted a thought experiment which shows that as we fire a cannon from a mountain, the gravitational force directed toward the center of the Earth and the acceleration will cause the projectile to fall to earth as suggested by the shortest trajectory. Newton reasoned that if the cannon ball is projected with the exact velocity, the projectile would never reach the Earth, which is curving away at the same rate the projectile falls, but it would travel around the Earth, falling in the gravitational field. Newton concluded that the orbit of the Moon was of the same nature, the Moon "fell" in its path around the Earth, because of the acceleration due to gravity, hence yielding its orbit. (Newton). Ultimately, it elucidates and justifies both the downwards force caused by the pull of the Earth as explained by Galileo and the force

It is undependable when it allows for a false conclusion even with comprehensive observation. Also, it is impossible to try infinite possibilities that test your theory in order to prove that it is 100 percent correct. For example, Newton’s law of motion and universal gravitation worked incredibly well in explaining terrestrial facts and the motion of the Moon and the planets. However, as with all the theories and combination of experimental results and reasoning, it is replaced by Einstein’s theory of relativity. The concept behind Quine-Duhme thesis is that theories like Newton’s theory of gravitation are never tested in seclusion. The theory makes predictions only when they are combined with auxiliary postulations such as number of planets, distribution of the mass and shape of a planet. Logic causes us to reject either the theory or auxiliary postulation if those predictions are false. Even so, Albert Einstein modified Newton’s law of gravity into his own theory of relativity. This proves that Newton’s reasoning is unable to try for boundless possibilities and there are countless theories replacing each other in constructing scientific