Logic-Deductive and Inductive; Learn through Aristotle Francis Bacon and JS Mill

Dr Aishwarya Balkal

ABSTRACT
This article explores the foundational principles of logic, highlight’s the distinction between deductive, inductive and Mill’s method and their application in the field of homoeopathy. Aristotle introduces the syllogistic method – from general premises to particular inference. But this method was inability to generate new knowledge. In contrast Lord Bacon’s inductive logic – from particular premises to universal inference. Stuart Mill further refined inductive logic through his five canons, the association of particulars. These logical methodologies have influenced the epistemological framework of homeopathy. While traditionally linked to Bacon’s inductive approach, homeopathy also inherently integrates deductive reasoning and Mill’s principle of association. The analysis highlights that logical reasoning—both inductive and deductive—is essential for scientific validation and clinical application in homeopathic practice.

KEY WORDS: Logic; Aristotle’s logic; Francis Bacon’s logic; Stuart Mill’s logic;

LOGIC

• Word meaning—logic is the Greek word derived from “logos,” which means reason, idea, or principle as the expression of thoughts.
• Definition—Logic is a science of correct reasoning.
• Reasoning is the intellectual faculty by which conclusions are drawn from premises by connected thoughts.

ARISTOTLE’S LOGIC
Aristotle is considered the founder of true logic. He is the father of both inductive and deductive logic. The most important logical work was Organon. The method of logic was called “syllogism,” otherwise formal logic.

DEFINITION
“Deductive reasoning is a logical process in which a conclusion is based on the concordance of multiple premises that are generally assumed to be true.”

• In deductive logic we infer what will happen in consequence of the law. Here a particular conclusion is drawn from universal premises, i.e., an inference is drawn from general to particular.
• Formal logic is deductive reasoning.

ARISTOTLE’S SYLLOGISM, OR FORMAL LOGIC, HAS 3 STATEMENTS, OR PROPOSITIONS.

THEY ARE:

• Major premise —A major premise is nothing but a basic truth, which has no proposition prior to it. It is a statement of a general or universal nature.
• Minor premise—A minor premise is a specific statement.
• Conclusion.

EXAMPLES OF DEDUCTIVE LOGIC

• All numbers ending in 0 or 5 are divisible by 5. The number 35 ends with a 5, so it must be divisible by 5.
• Cacti are plants, and all plants perform photosynthesis. Therefore, cacti perform photosynthesis.

MAJOR CRITICISM

1. There is no method to verify whether the major premise is right or wrong.
2. Induction will give new knowledge, but deduction will not give new knowledge; only the available knowledge can be arranged accordingly.

INDUCTION AND DEDUCTION

• According to Aristotle, induction and deduction are not separable, i.e., without induction, deduction is never possible, and without deduction, the final conclusion is not possible.” Hence, both are mutual and complementary.

ARISTOTLE’S LOGIC AND HOMEOPATHY

• Before, it was taught that homeopathy is built upon the inductive method of Bacon. However all the theories of homeopathy are a combination of induction and deduction. When we make a general principle, unknowingly we make a deduction, and that unknowing deduction is partly an intuition.

LORD FRANCIS BACON’S LOGIC

• Bacon is the founder of the modern inductive method and the pioneer in the attempt at a logical systematization of scientific procedure. He came from an aristocratic background.

VIEWS ON THE SYLLOGISTIC METHOD:

• The syllogistic method is only helpful for rearranging the acquired knowledge. The major premise is the only knowledge, and the same knowledge is applied in the minor premise and conclusion. Hence he said that the major premise alone is sufficient. The remaining two are automatic, and there is no contribution or originality in that.
• He emphasized the importance of systematic and methodical observation and experimentation in natural sciences.
• Bacon said syllogism is useless for scientific discovery, and it is never useful in making any new discoveries.
• After Aristotle, he was the first one to emphasize the importance of induction as the only method for scientific discovery.
• Bacon’s interest was to find out a better kind of induction than simple enumeration.

DEFINITION

• “Inductive method in logic is the scientific method that proceeds by induction.”
• Induction is a process of drawing universal conclusions from particular premises.
• Lord Bacon originated this method. He set forth in his “Novum Organum.”
• John Stuart Mill, in his great system of logic, further developed it.
• By inductive reasoning we ascertain what is true of many things. A universal conclusion is drawn from a particular premise. From a number of observations, a general conclusion is drawn. It is commonly called “generalizing” because we begin with specific details and progress to a general principle as a conclusion.

REQUIREMENTS FOR INDUCTIVE LOGIC

1. Exact observation
2. Correct interpretation
3. Rational explanation of the facts
4. Scientific conclusion

EXACT OBSERVATION

Exact means correct or accurate both scientifically and rationally. To observe means to perceive something. Therefore, exact observation means to perceive something accurately and minutely.

CORRECT INTERPRETATION

Correct or precise means accuracy of expression or freedom from error. Interpretation is to attach a rational explanation to what we perceive. This means interpretation of the collected information should be free from error. Correct interpretation of the observed facts with the view to understand them in relation to each other and their causes

RATIONAL EXPLANATION

Rational means based on or in accordance with reason or logic. Explanation means to clarify in minute details. Observed facts should be clarified in detail on reasonable grounds based on their cause or laws governing them.

SCIENTIFIC CONCLUSION

The conclusion we draw should be based on accurately observed facts interpreted precisely and rationally explained. We put the obtained facts in such coordination that the conclusion shall be scientific and in par with reality.

EXAMPLES OF INDUCTIVE LOGIC

• Johnnie is an intelligent student. He is studying medicine.
• Annie is an intelligent student. She is studying medicine.
• Joseph is an intelligent student. He is studying medicine.
• Therefore, all students who study medicine are intelligent.

HAHNEMANN AND BACON’S METHOD

• Discovery of homeopathy was based on the methodology advocated by Bacon.
• Hahnemann did a systematic observation.
• He has gone through many experiences where he observed that similarity could be a reason for a cure in disease.

JOHN STUART MILL (1803-1873)

• This theory is very similar to the “Charvaka” theories in India and “Epicureanism” in Greece. They never demanded sacrifices in this life for the advantages in the life after death.
• His induction is called the principle of association. He thought there was no need of making generalizations. Instead, association between particular events is sufficient.
• No need to take any abstract form of the particular events as a general principle. His method of induction is associated between particulars, that is, one particular to another similar particular.
• Similarity is the basis of association.

MILL’S INDUCTION AND HOMEOPATHY

• Prescriptions are always based on the commonality of particulars.
• Pure homeopathic practice, seeing the patient, studying the disease, and comparing the disease with that of a known medicine is purely correlation of particulars on the basis of similarity.

MILLS’ FIVE ‘CANONS’ OF INDUCTION

• The method of agreement
• The method of difference
• The joint Method of Agreement and Difference
• The Method of Residues
• The Method of Concomitant Variation

1. THE METHOD OF AGREEMENT

If two or more instances of the phenomenon under investigation have only one circumstance in common, the circumstance in which all the instances agree is the cause (or effect) of the given phenomenon.

E.g., scurvy and vitamin C

2. THE METHOD OF DIFFERENCE

If an instance in which the phenomenon under investigation occurs and an instance in which it does not occur have every circumstance in common except one, that one occurring in the former, the circumstance in which alone the two instances differ is the effect, or the cause, or an indispensable part of the cause, of the phenomenon.

For example, if two exactly similar pieces of iron are heated in a charcoal-burning furnace and hammered into shape in exactly similar ways, except that the first is dipped into water after the final heating while the second is not, and the first is found to be harder than the second, then the dipping of iron into water while it is hot is the cause of such extra hardness—or at least an essential part of the cause, for the hammering, the charcoal fire, and so on may also be needed. For all this experiment shows, the dipping alone might not produce such extra hardness.

3. THE JOINT METHOD OF AGREEMENT & DIFFERENCE

A combination of the methods of agreement and difference. Compare a variety of situations in which a certain factor is present to similar situations in which that factor is absent. Then show that a certain effect is observed in all and only those instances in which that factor is present.

E.g..

•  Good actor + good director = hit movie
• Acting was good, but direction was not up to the mark. Hit movie
• Acting was not up to the mark, but direction was good. Hit movie

4. THE METHOD OF CONCOMITANT VARIATIONS

In which the simultaneous variation in similar degrees of condition and event establishes a causal relation

E.g.. Food cooking in normal circumstances, Food cooking with high pressure

With optimum pressure, food cooks fast.

So pressure is the concomitant here, which enhances the event to happen.

5. THE METHOD OF RESIDUES

Show that all of the factors known to have some influence upon a certain effect cannot explain the observed level of the effect. Then attribute the residual influence to an unexamined cause.

The method of residues is most effective in cases where one cannot directly measure the level of influence a factor has over some effect.

Eg., diabetes and lifestyle

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN INDUCTION

• Mill’s induction—particular to particular (induction with similar association)
• Bacon’s induction—particular to general. (induction with generalization)
• Aristotle—General to Particular (Deduction)

IN HOMEOPATHY—APPLICATION

• Principle of Similia—Induction and Deduction
• Chronic Miasm, dynamization—Induction and Deduction
• Homeopathic prescription—Mill’s method of induction.

CONCLUSION
Logic, as the science of reasoning, forms a conceptual backbone of both scientific discovery and medical decision. Aristotle’s deductive reasoning provides a structure for deriving specific truths from universal laws, while Bacon’s inductive method emphasizes observation and the formulation of general principles. Mill’s refinement through associative reasoning between particulars further enhances the applicability of logic in practical fields. Deductive logic helps in applying established homoeopathic principles, inductive logic especially Mill’s association of particulars helps in selection of remedy. The formulation of principles like Similia Similibus Curentur, the development of chronic disease theories, and the prescription process all involve a dynamic interplay of induction and deduction. Finally, these forms of logic or method of reasoning strengthens both scientific reliability and therapeutic effectiveness oh homoeopathic practice.

Dr Aishwarya Balkal
PG Scholar Department of organon of medicine and homoeopathic philosophy
Father muller homoeopathic medical College and hospital, Deralakatte, Mangaluru