Inductive Probability

While we may classify inductive arguments as valid or

invalid and sound or unsound, we typically evaluate
them in terms of their inductive probability. Inductive
probability refers to the likelihood that an inductive
argument with true premises will give a true conclusion.
If an argument has high inductive probability, its
conclusion is very likely to be to be true if its premises
are true.
An argument with low inductive probability is less likely
to have a true conclusion even if its premises are true.
Three factors affect the inductive probability of an
argument.
The strength of the argument's premises;
The strength of the argument's conclusion; and
The relevance of the premises to the conclusion.
Arguments with strong premises tend to have a higher
inductive probability than arguments with weak
premises.
All else being equal, arguments with weak conclusions
tend to have a higher inductive probability than
arguments with strong conclusions.
Strengthening the premises and/or weakening the
conclusion of an argument may not always make for a
high probability argument. A third factor affecting the
inductive probability of an argument is whether the
premises in an argument are relevant to the
argument's conclusion. Arguments where the premises
are highly relevant to the conclusion have a higher
inductive probability than arguments where the
premises have little relevance to the conclusion.

Example
Strength of Premise
Argument 1.
Premise: "Some of the referrals we receive are for
people with a substance abuse problem."
Therefore
Conclusion: "The next referral we receive will be for a
person with a substance abuse problem."
Argument 2.
Premise: "Most of the referrals we receive are for
people with a substance abuse problem."
Therefore
Conclusion: "The next referral we receive will be for a
person with a substance abuse problem."
Since both of the two preceding inductive arguments
have the same conclusion ("The next referral we
receive will be for a person with a substance
abuse problem"), the two conclusions have the
same strength.
Their premises, however, do not have the same
strength.
Since "some of the referrals" is a vaguer statement
than "most of the referrals," the first argument's
premise is not as specific and, therefore, not as
strong as the second argument's premise.
The premise in the first argument will be true if any
number greater than zero referrals are for people
with a substance abuse problem. It could be true
if only one-tenth of one percent of our referrals
were for people with a substance abuse problem.
At the other extreme, it could be true if 100
percent of our referrals were for people with a
substance abuse problem.
The premise in the second argument will be true if any
number greater than half of the referrals are for
people with a substance abuse problem. Unlike
the premise in the first argument, the second

argument's premise could not be true if only onetenth of one percent of our referrals were for
people with a substance abuse problem. The
minimum proportion would be one more than
50% of our referrals. It also could be true if 100
percent of our referrals were for people with a
substance abuse problem.
Since the first argument's premise covers more
possibilities than the second, it is less specific
(and weaker) than the second argument's
premise.
So, if the premises in the two arguments are each true,
the conclusion of the first argument will be true
less often, on average, than the conclusion of the
second argument.
Thus, the second argument will have a higher inductive
probability than the first.
Strength of Conclusion
Argument 3.
Premise: "Most of the referrals we receive are for
people with a substance abuse problem."
Therefore
Conclusion: "At least one of the next five referrals we
receive will be for a person with a substance
abuse problem."
Argument 4.
Premise: "Most of the referrals we receive are for
people with a substance abuse problem."
Therefore
Conclusion: "At least four of the next five referrals we
receive will be for a person with a substance
abuse problem."
Since arguments three and four have the same
premise, the premises in both of the preceding
inductive arguments have the same strength.
Their conclusions, however, do not have the same
strength.

The third argument's conclusion will be true if one, two,

three, four or five of the next five referrals are for
a person with a substance abuse problem.
The fourth argument's conclusion will be true only if
four or five of the next five referrals are for a
person with a substance abuse problem.
Since the third argument's conclusion is not as spedific
as the fourth argument's conclusion, the third
argument's conclusion is not as strong as the
fourth argument's conclusion.
Futher, since the third argument's conclusion is not as
spedific as the fourth argument's conclusion, the
third argument will be true under more
circumstances than the fourth argument.
Thus, the third argument will have a higher inductive
probability than the fourth.
Relevance of Premise to Conclusion
Argument 5.
Premise: "An average of 50% of the referrals we
receive each month are for people with a
substance abuse problem."
Therefore
Conclusion: "Between 40% and 60% of the referrals
we shall receive next month will be for a person
with a substance abuse problem."
Argument 6.
Premise: "An average of 50% of the referrals we
receive each month are for people with a
substance abuse problem."
Therefore
Conclusion: "Between 55% and 75% of the referrals
we shall receive next month will be for a person
with a substance abuse problem."
Since both of the preceding two inductive arguments
have the same premise, the premises have equal
strength.
While the arguments have different conclusions, each

of the conclusions cover a range of 20 percentage

points. This means that each conclusion has the
same level of specificity as the other. Thus, the
conclusions for both arguments have the same
strength.
Where the arguments differ is in the relevance of the
premises to the conclusions.
The premise in article six is less relevant to its
conclusion than the premise in argument five.
Specifically, the percentage of referrals (50%)
described in the argument five premise is more
consistent with the range of percentages (40% to
60%) in the argument five conclusion than
percentage (50%) in the argument six premise is
consistent with the range of percentages (55% to
75%) in the argument six conclusion.
Since the argument five premise and conclusion are
more consistent with each other than the
argument six premise and conclusion, the
argument five premise and conclusion have a
greater relevance to each other than do the
argument six premise and conclusion.
This means that the conclusion for argument five will
be true more often than the conclusion for
argument six.
In other words, argument five will have a higher
inductive probability than argument six.

Self-Test
1. Which of these arguments has the highest inductive
probability?
Argument 7.
In 90% of families at our center whose primary concern
is parent-adolescent conflict, parents and adolescents
incorrectly attribute negative motivations to each other.

Therefore
In the next family that we see whose primary concern is
parent-adolescent conflict, parents and adolescents will
incorrectly attribute negative motivations to each other.
Argument 8.
In 90% of families at our center whose primary concern
is parent-adolescent conflict, parents and adolescents
incorrectly attribute negative motivations to each other.
Therefore
In both of the next two families that we see whose
primary concern is parent-adolescent conflict, parents
and adolescents will incorrectly attribute negative
motivations to each other.
Argument 9.
In 90% of families at our center whose primary concern
is parent-adolescent conflict, parents and adolescents
incorrectly attribute negative motivations to each other.
Therefore
In each of the next three families that we see whose
primary concern is parent-adolescent conflict, parents
and adolescents will incorrectly attribute negative
motivations to each other.
None.
There is no way to compare the inductive probabilities
of these arguments.

2. Which of these arguments has the highest inductive

probability?
Argument 10.
All of our clients are adults.

All of our clients are U.S. citizens.

Over 60% of those U.S. citizens eligible to vote are
registered voters.
Therefore
At least half of our clients are registered voters.
Argument 11.
All of our clients are involuntary referrals.
All of our clients are U.S. citizens.
Over 60% of those U.S. citizens eligible to vote are
registered voters.
Therefore
At least half of our clients are registered voters.
Argument 12.
All of our clients have chronic disabilities.
All of our clients are U.S. citizens.
Over 60% of those U.S. citizens eligible to vote are
registered voters.
Therefore
At least half of our clients are registered voters.
None.
There is no way to compare the inductive probabilities
of these arguments.

3. Which of these arguments has the highest inductive

probability?
Argument 13.
Higher scores on the Beck Hopelessness Scale are
associated with higher risk of attempting suicide.
Elwood's individual weekly scores over this time period
were 17, 19, 12, 17 and 17.

Therefore
Elwood will attempt suicide during the next week.
Argument 14.
Higher scores on the Beck Hopelessness Scale are
associated with higher risk of attempting suicide.
Jake's individual weekly scores over this time period
were 17, 18, 18, 17 and 17.
Therefore
Jake will attempt suicide during the next week.
Argument 15.
Higher scores on the Beck Hopelessness Scale are
associated with higher risk of attempting suicide.
Penrod's individual weekly scores over this time period
were 17, 20, 12, 16 and 17.
Therefore
Penrod will attempt suicide during the next week.
None.
There is no way to compare the inductive probabilities
of these arguments.