Induction: Complete and Incomplete Enumeration, Certainty and Probability

Read-only question overview. Answers and scoring remain inside authenticated learner attempts.

• What is the primary direction of induction?
• What does “investigating most particulars” mean in the source?
• How does a claim about 30 observed members differ from a claim about the whole class?
• Why does incomplete induction not entail certainty?
• According to the book, what does incomplete induction ordinarily yield?
• What logical issue is illustrated by the book’s animal-jaw example?
• Why does the book mention a crocodile?
• What suffices to refute “Every student is present”?
• Which is a clear case of complete induction?
• What is essential for complete induction?
• If a school has exactly four rooms and all four are checked, what may follow?
• What other name do the notes use for complete induction?
• What gives force to a syllogism by division?
• What role does “Every body is inanimate, animal, or plant” play?
• What does “mutaḥayyiz” mean in the book’s example of bodies?
• What if a relevant class of bodies was omitted from the division?
• Under what condition is certainty from complete induction warranted?
• When could examining 200 objects still be incomplete induction?
• Which statement correctly describes incomplete induction?
• After observing lights in 100 houses, what is a claim that every house has lights?
• What distinction is illustrated by deduction from premises versus generalization from cases?
• Which is a genuine counterexample to “Every room is lit”?
• What is not necessarily established by many observations from one subgroup?
• What exactly is “incomplete” about incomplete induction?
• Which pair matches the notes’ distinction?
• How will analogy differ from induction?
• If every case was examined but one observation is false, what follows?
• Why is a claim limited to examined cases different from a universal generalization?
• If a class has exactly five members and all five are accurately examined, the induction can be complete.
• The conclusion of incomplete induction is always false, so it cannot even yield prevailing probability.
• One genuine counterexample refutes a universal affirmative claim of the form “Every A is B.”