Abductive reasoning

Last updated: Tuesday, 02 July 2024

Abductive reasoning is a form of logical inference that seeks to find the simplest, most likely explanation or hypothesis for an observed phenomenon or set of data, based on the available information. Contrasting with inductive (identifying new cases of existing theories) and deductive reasoning (testing existing theories with new observations), it aims to produce new hypotheses and theories based on surprising or anomalous empirical findings.

Big argument here is that abductive reasoning is congruent with everyday forms of sensemaking and reasoning, based on incomplete or partial evidence?

One key aspect of abductive reasoning is the role of surprise and disconcertment1. When we encounter unexpected or anomalous observations, it prompts us to question our existing assumptions. This process of embracing and working with anomalies is crucial for theorising and knowledge creation.

Abductive reasoning seeks to generate new hypotheses and explanations based on empirical observations. This is an iterative process. New hypotheses are continuously refined and tested against additional observations and evidence. This iterative nature supports a dynamic, evolving understanding of the phenomenon under investigation.

  • cultivating and working with anomalies?
  • role of the researcher’s community of inquiry2?

  1. Connect with the work of Helen Verran. ⤴︎

  2. Need to scrutinise the differences between a “community of inquiry” and a “community of practice”; if we look past the logocentricism and academic exceptionalism, think there’s a case to be made that the former is, in fact, a subcategory of the latter. ⤴︎

Tags: epistemics

Backlinks