Deductive Reasoning Deductive reasoning is the form of reasoning in which a

conclusion follows logically and coherently from the factual premises and
proposition. These deductive arguments are based upon the concept of sound and
consistent reasoning. If the premises are true, than the systematic reasoning with a
constructed syllogism is considered valid in a deductive argument in making its
conclusion certain with a degree of logical certainty. Plainly speaking. deductive
reasoning is the rationality of reasoning from pure logic. It is considered sound and
pure logic.

Inductive Reasoning Inductive reasoning is a form of reasoning that uses analogies,

examples, observations, and experiences to form conclusive propositions. Inductive
logic also uses experiences to formulate statements based on general observations of
recurring patterns in nature, science, and everyday occurrences pulling from such things
as samples cases, experiments, and natural eye observations. It is used mostly to
explain properties and relations to objects or types based on previous observations. It
must be understood that inductive arguments do not try to establish their conclusions
through absolute certainty, but through observable and predictive certainty.

Abductive Reasoning In laymens terms abductive reasoning is an argument to the

best explanation. It is a form of reasoning that concludes in an abductive argument of
what is plausible or most possibly true. Abductive logic is also considered inference to
the best explanation. It is choosing the most likely or best hypothesis or explanation
based upon the (most) relevant evidence. Some people think that it is closer to
inductive reasoning because it is not as sound logically as deducing an argument using
pure logic as in deductive reasoning. Others think it is closer to deductive reasoning,
because using sound logic one eliminates the most unlikely argument to come to the
most reasonable solution. I like to call it, the best compromise between an inductive
and deductive argument.

Reductive Reasoning Reductive reasoning is a subset of argumentative reasoning

which seeks to demonstrate that a statement is true by showing that a false or absurd
result/circumstance follows from its denial. It is proving a statement true by reducing
to the opposite of it and showing the absurdity of the opposite result. It is logically
reasoning to the absurd or reducing to the absurd; hence the name why reductive
reasoning is also called Reductio ad absurdum (Latin: reduction to
absurdity). Reductive Reasoning is also considered a mixture of deductive & inductive
reasoning. Inductive, because it strives to prove understanding of what is likely to be
true. And deductive because it does resemble traits of critically and rationally of
deductively reducing down to a conclusive or non-conclusive argument.

Fallacious Reasoning Fallacious Reasoning is not real reasoning, it is the faulty

premises for critical thinking and logic. One of the tall tell signs of fallacious reasoning
is a logical fallacy. A fallacy is usually an error in reasoning and argumentation often
due to a misconception, false premises, or presumptuous conclusions.
Circular Reasoning is actually considered more of a form of fallacious reasoning. It
would not be considered valid nor useful in a live debate.
In Summary:
Deductive Reasoning: What is (absolutely) true?
Inductive Reasoning: What is observably (most) true?
Abductive Reasoning: What is most likely true?
Reductive Reasoning: What is NOT true?
Fallacious Reasoning: What you think is true?