On the other hand inductive logic/reasoning talks of going from several specific experiences or observations to making a generalized conclusion. Inductive logic is a very common way of arriving at a conclusion. On several occasions I myself have made assumptions or generalization from my past experiences and observations. For example: I once made a generalization that all girls are emotional because every girl that I made met would generally be emotional. This generalization seemed logical and understandable; however the problem of such a generalization (called the ‘problem of induction’) is that it is made upon the basis of observation and experiences that the person making the generalization has had. Taking into consideration that the persons observation and experiences are confined to a specific area (or in this case a specific number of girls) then it is likely that the persons generalization is only valid to that specific area (or in this case the generalization of the girls being emotional is a one that is only valid/applicable to that group of girls) and may be proven to be invalid/false in another area (or in this case another girl that turns out not to be emotional). My generalization of all girls being emotional was eventually falsified when I met one that was quite the opposite. Therefore, this proves that inductive reasoning may not be a reliable or objective way of knowing because of what I call the ‘confined conclusion’.
Moreover, the ‘induction problem’ is one that occurs often due to people’s careless assumption creating nature. Hence making it an increasingly unreliable way of knowing. But then again, inductive reasoning could also seem as a rather reliable way of knowing to some extent due to the evidence provided perhaps through extensive experience or observation on a specific topic and perhaps the conclusion seems to be inevitable. For example; since the longest time that I can remember, summer season has always been the hottest of all seasons, therefore I expect that this summer will also be hotter than the rest. Now this seems like a reasonable conclusion or assumption. Hence, inductive reasoning could also be a reliable way of knowing.
One of the greatest barriers to reasoning as a way of knowing is the problem of language, particularly to the meaning and definition of words. Where the presence of an ambiguous word conceals the fact that there is no real disagreement. For example: the word ‘band’ has multiple meanings and therefore could be very controversial. Band can mean a group of musicians, and it could also mean a ring of elastic. In addition, phrases and comments in specific could sometimes be perceived in the wrong way and therefore influencing ones reasoning in the way that they perceived it rather than the way that the comments or phrases were intended to be perceived. Only recently I found myself in a similar situation. My friends and I had just started having lunch while we waited for our other friends. When the others arrived to the table having gotten their lunch, one of them had a lot of potatoes on her plate and I said to her “too much potatoes is not good for health”, Ironically she was quite a hefty person and perceived the comment in a negative/insulting manner. Therefore we can see that even though my intention was solely to give helpful advice, the girl misinterpreted what I was saying and used her reasoning to arrive a false conclusion. Hence language becomes a problem when there is no precise meaning to various terms. The language barrier in reasoning could be classified as an unreliable way of knowing because of its controversial nature.
Furthermore, Ones emotion and personal experience could influence their reasoning in various situations and this could be a major factor that makes reasoning in many cases a rather unreliable way of knowing. Emotion could lead to bias on one side of a given argument due to the attached/related emotions to that specific side of the argument. It is habitual for human beings to relate certain events or situations to their past or their own personal experience. This relation is often a determining factor of the reasoning of the person. A common example of emotion being a factor which determines ones reasoning is in the advertising business, in which case the adverts appeal to the emotions of the viewers which could potentially change their reasoning towards a particular product and in effect convincing/tempting the viewers to purchase the product being advertised. I have reason to believe that emotions play a vital role in reasoning especially when the topic is one that creates a connection with your experience. About two years ago a tragedy took place. Our house and supermarket, located in Bungoma (in Western Province), burned down to ashes in the span of around fourteen hours. Our circumstances were pitiable as you can imagine, having lost everything in one night. No clothes, no food, no shelter and no money. Luckily we had some family friends in the area who helped us and took us in their house. After all that had happened my dad said to me “Sohail, it can take you twenty years to build and nurture your business and only a few hours to destroy it all. Yesterday we had money, today we don’t, but if you’re well educated you will regain the money.” Therefore when I am involved in a certain argument that has to do with ‘Money being everything’ I would usually disagree and say otherwise. Perhaps also if I were to see someone I know go through the same experience then my reasoning would be to actually try and help that person as opposed to just being sorry for that person because I have been through a similar situation and I know best how it feels and what the person is going through. Consequently emotion greatly influences reasoning in that it tends to take over ones logical way of thinking, and so could prove to be an unreliable way of knowing. However, personal experience could prove to be a reliable way of knowing because ones experience in a certain situation would allow that person to know how to go about that situation in the future for a better experience.
I believe that it is human nature to simply make assumptions on a daily basis for the sake of arriving at conclusions and this certainly may make reasoning unreliable in some cases and reliable in others. Deductive reasoning could be quite a reliable and objective way of knowing in that if the premises are true then the conclusion is true, however in certain cases this could be problematic because of the trickiness of the premises itself. While language barrier and emotion plays a major part in ones reasoning, it may not be a reliable way of knowing, while personal experience could be a reliable way of knowing because ones experience would enable the person to reason in a different way to handle the situation better than someone who hasn’t had experience in that specific field.
