The current debate around Roe v. Wade and the policy of granting abortion rights shows the use of deductive and inductive reasoning. Argumentation often indicates the logic of reason and the strengths and weaknesses of the deductive and inductive methods. For example, a popular pro-choice deductive argument is “my body, my choice.” It comes from the premise that a woman has the right to control her body and make decisions related to her body. Based on this, it is concluded that she has the right to make medical decisions about her body, taking all responsibility and risks for herself. Even decisions such as refusing resuscitation are respected by law. However, one can agree with this deductive argument only if the original statement is considered true, believing that only one body is involved in the abortion – the female. This weak pro-choice argument that the opposing side often destroys at the premise stage.

The first step in the argument check should be the truthfulness of the premise test. It checks the first statement on which the argument is based (Facione & Gittens, 2016). In this case, the premise is false because no one body is involved in the abortion, but two – the mother and the fetus. The fetus has separate DNA from the mother and is not fully part of her body. If the original statement were true, this deductive argument would pass the test of strength since if we imagine that the premise is correct, then the logical chain appears harmonious and consistent. If a person has the right to make any medical decision regarding their own body, then abortion is such a medical decision.

We will write acustom essay on your topictailored to your instructions!

183experts online

Let us help you

A stronger position, in this case, is the recognition that two parties are involved in the abortion situation. Inductively speaking, there is a range of factual and historical evidence of the harm of the prohibition of abortion, both for the woman and the fetus. First, the ban on abortions leads to increased illegal abortions, high female mortality, and an increase in infertility (Jatav, 2021). Second, restrictions on abortion lead to the use of diagnostic restriction practices that affect the fate of the fetus (Jatav, 2021). Third, poor women are restricted in their travel opportunities to have an abortion (Foster et al.,2018). It increases poverty, which people cannot get out of for generations. Fourth, banning abortion without exception will lead to tragic stories that can increase subsequent child abuse (Foster et al.,2018). The prohibition of abortion with exceptions will raise the question of who, how, and when should decide whether abortion will be performed or not.

This inductive argument has several statements on which the conclusion is based. Since they are all supported by links to valid, up-to-date scientific sources, they pass the truthfulness of the premise test (Facione & Gittens, 2016). The logic test checks whether it is possible to imagine a different result of the premium action. In this case, is it possible, seeing the socio-cultural consequences of the prohibition of abortion, to conclude that the right to abortion does more harm to society than good? Since the data confirm the relationship between the ban on abortion and the increase in child and maternal estimates and adverse social effects, it can be concluded that this argument passes validity and logic tests.

Thus, many factors lead to the decision that the abortion ban has many negative consequences and is objectively harmful. Regardless of how many bodies are involved in abortion, the social implications of abolishing abortion will lead to more deaths, injuries, or social problems. This inductive reasoning is more substantial because it has several facts, each of which will be less easy to refute than the original premise of the deductive reasoning above.

References

Facione, P., & Gittens, C. A. (2016). Think Critically. Third Edition. Pearson.

Foster, D. G., Biggs, M. A., Raifman, S., Gipson, J., Kimport, K., & Rocca, C. H. (2018). Comparison of health, development, maternal bonding, and poverty among children born after denial of abortion vs. after pregnancies subsequent to an abortion. JAMA Pediatrics, 172(11), 1053-1060.

Jatav, S. (2021). Abortion laws: Pro-choice arguments from the lens of morality. Supremo Amicus, 24, 101.