In most pieces of philosophical prose, the word “abduction” is used as a terminological concept in two similar yet contrasting capacities. The similarity shared by these two capacities is that it is used to explain something using reasoning. Traditionally it was used to describe an explanation using reasoning for the formulation of hypotheses, while more recently it’s definition has been altered to incorporate that of an explanation using reasoning to justify a hypothesis. In the more recent version, abduction can be described as “inference to the best explanation”. In these series of articles on the topic of abduction we will explore the more recent definition and context this word provides.
The majority of philosophers are in mutual agreement over the use of abduction as inference to the best explanation being a phenomena and type of reasoning that is commonly used, to varying degrees, both in the sense of day to day activities as well as in the scope of scientific thinking. Despite this, there is no set standard for what abduction really is in the most concrete sense and is usually a matter of debate. Abduction has some slight differences with other modes of inference, and these are mentioned here, together with it’s philosophical application as well as externally, examines some examples of it both in their stricter definition as well as the wider sense of abduction, attempts to dissect the standard definition, and analyzes the interrelation between abduction and Bayesian confirmation theory.
The Essence of Abduction
You are in possession of knowledge regarding an argument between your friends Tom and Henry in which their friendship has been abruptly destroyed. All of a sudden your friend Alison said she saw Tom and Henry together at the cinema. Your most likely thought, assuming you don’t thin Alison has a reason to lie to you, is that Tom and Henry have made up and are friends again. Then one late morning you wake up and find a plate and cup on the kitchen table, with breadcrumbs and some peanut butter smeared on it, and beside this plate is a knife that seems to be dipped into a marmalade like substance, a jar of sugar and a half finished bag of milk inside a pitcher.
From this you draw the assumption that one of your family members had a fast breakfast but didn’t care to clean up after themselves. This is the most likely scenario that could’ve happened, you think to yourself. There is also the possibility that the house had been burglarized while you were sleeping and the burglar took the honor of eating some of your food before making off with your valuable goods whose misplacement you’ve yet to uncover. Or there is also the chance your family members wanted you to think someone ate some food so purposefully put all these things on the table to create a scene that would have you come to that natural conclusion. These two alternatives whilst also possible seem too arbitrary and unlikely as explanations of what had transpired before you, as opposed to the first more natural and neutral conclusion.