Abduction

“Abductive logic”, “Abduction”, or “Abductive reasoning” is one of the types of logical reasoning alongside inductive and deductive reasoning. In general terms, deduction refers to drawing a particular conclusion from a general principle. As long as the principal is true, a deductive statement will always be valid (for example, “All people are mortal”, “I am a person”, “Therefore I am mortal”.). Induction, conversely, refers to inferring a general principle out of a body of knowledge made up of particular instances. The “problem of induction” has a long history in the philosophy of science, addressing the question of how to draw valid general principles out of specific observations.

Abduction differs from both of those types as a type of inference that seeks explanatory connections, with a strong role played by intuition and experience. The precise definition differs slightly depending on the approach, the main approaches relevant to this space being outlined in the following sections. The three types of reasoning have implications about the contexts and circumstances where their use is most appropriate, and they imply certain relationships between past and future and their symmetry and asymmetry. In general, the more asymmetric the relationship between past and future, i.e., the less certain we are that past knowledge and observations are going to repeat in the future, the more relevant and appropriate abductive reasoning becomes.

Examples:

Deduction


All the beans from this bag are white


These beans are from this bag


Therefore, these beans are all white

Induction


These beans are from this bag


These beans are white


Therefore, all the beans from this bag are white

Abduction


All the beans from this bag are white


These beans are white


Therefore these beans are from this bag.

Other resources

Dave Snowden, Risk and resilience, video uploaded by Cognitive Edge (16 May 2011)

Blogs

• Dave Snowden, Patterns & pragmatism 2 of 3, The Cynefin Co website (January 13, 2024)