3. Questions 9, 10 & 11

These questions also show how asking too many questions in one go can cause problems.

  1. What is the essential feature of an inductive argument?
    Give an example in your answer.

  2. What is the essential feature of a deductive argument?
    Give an example in your answer.

  3. What is the essential feature of a conductive argument?
    Give an example in your answer.

***GPT says***

  1. The essential feature of an inductive argument is that it relies on the accumulation of evidence to support its conclusion. Inductive arguments are based on probability rather than certainty, and are used to draw generalizations or predictions based on specific observations or data. An example of an inductive argument is:

    Premise 1: Every cat I have ever seen has fur.
    Premise 2: Therefore, all cats have fur.
    Conclusion: The cat that just walked into the room also has fur.

    This argument is inductive because it relies on the observation of a limited number of cats to make a generalization about all cats. While the conclusion is not guaranteed to be true, it is considered probable based on the evidence presented.

  2. The essential feature of a deductive argument is that its conclusion necessarily follows from its premises. Deductive arguments are based on logical entailment and are used to demonstrate the validity of a conclusion based on known facts or premises. An example of a deductive argument is:

    Premise 1: All humans are mortal.
    Premise 2: Socrates is a human.
    Conclusion: Therefore, Socrates is mortal.

    This argument is deductive because the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises. The conclusion is certain, assuming the truth of the premises.

  3. The essential feature of a conductive argument is that it combines elements of both inductive and deductive reasoning.
    Conductive arguments are used to provide support for a conclusion by using a combination of generalizations and specific observations. An example of a conductive argument is:

    Premise 1: Most humans are mortal.
    Premise 2: Socrates is a human.
    Conclusion 1: Therefore, Socrates is probably mortal.
    Premise 3: However, Socrates is also reported to have exceptional wisdom and insight.
    Conclusion 2: Therefore, Socrates may have attained a degree of intellectual immortality through his ideas.

    This argument is conductive because it uses inductive reasoning to support the conclusion that Socrates is probably mortal, based on the generalization that most humans are mortal. However, it also uses deductive reasoning to support the conclusion that Socrates may have attained intellectual immortality, based on the specific observation of his exceptional wisdom and insight.


The example given in question  9 isn't quite correct although it would have worked if it had been presented as a serial argument with an intermediate conclusion. It might be debatable as to whether a candidate would earn the mark with this example. My sense is that they would. The explanation of the example would probably be enough to persuade that the candidate knew what the question was trying to assess and the layout of the answer is a different problem which isn't actually being assessed by this question.

However, the bot's answer to question 11 is way off. It is the kind of thing a pupil would make up just to say something when they don't know the answer. An unlucky guess. It is difficult to know why the bot has come up with this answer but it has presumably been somehow led astray by the question being in the context of the previous two questions. In the material with which it has been trained there will have been an abundance of information on inductive and deductive arguments and relatively little about conductive arguments. That abundance of information seems to have overwhelmed its search for an answer to the third question. If you ask that question by itself the bot does much better.

what is a conductive argument?

A conductive argument is a type of argument that consists of several individual arguments, each of which supports a specific conclusion. The individual arguments may not be conclusive in themselves, but together they make a strong case for the overall conclusion.

In a conductive argument, the individual arguments are not necessarily independent of each other, and they may even overlap in terms of the evidence and reasoning they present. The strength of the overall argument lies in the cumulative force of the individual arguments.

The idea behind a conductive argument is that by presenting multiple, related arguments in support of a conclusion, the overall argument becomes stronger and more persuasive than any of the individual arguments would be on their own.

Conductive arguments are often used in legal, philosophical, and scientific contexts where the complexity of the subject matter requires a nuanced and layered approach to argumentation.

Give an example of a conductive argument

A conductive argument is an argument that presents multiple reasons, each of which provides some support for a conclusion but does not individually prove the conclusion. Instead, the conclusion is reached by considering the cumulative force of all the reasons presented. Here is an example of a conductive argument:

Premise 1: Tom is a hard worker who is always on time for work.
Premise 2: Tom has a lot of experience in the field.
Premise 3: Tom is known for his attention to detail and high-quality work.
Premise 4: Tom has a degree from a well-respected university.
Premise 5: Tom has a strong track record of completing projects on time and within budget.

Conclusion: Therefore, Tom would be an excellent candidate for the job.

In this argument, each premise provides some evidence for the conclusion that Tom would be an excellent candidate for the job. However, none of the individual premises alone are sufficient to prove the conclusion. It is the cumulative force of all the reasons presented that make the argument conductive.