Deduction (n.) is ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠often characterized as one in which the premises entail, or demonstrate, the conclusion... while an inductive inference is one in which the premises, or evidence, only 'support.' But do not entail, the conclusion.

Deduction (n.) is ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠like induction a way of approaching an argument, such that any deductive argument can be reformulated to be inductive.

Deduction (n.) is ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠an argument from the universal to the particular whereas induction is an argument from the particular to the universal.

Deduction (n.) is ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠an argument from rule or law (i.e. Height leads to success) whereas induction is an argument from observation (i.e. Tall boys seem to have more success).

The Dialectic (n.) is ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠not a paradox but a perversity whereby a commonsense empiricist view of reality is repudiated and undermined, until we understand that the interpretations are in fact part of the 'first impression'.

Dialectic (n.) can ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠only be an emergency measure for those obliged to extort their rights — a merciless weapon that leaves the victim to prove he is not an idiot.

Dialectic (n.) was ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠the mob's victory over noble taste: the well-bred commanded and needed no reasons; what can be demonstrated is of little worth.

Dialectic (n.) is ⁠​‌​​​‌​​​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​⁠a form of revenge: the dialectician makes his opponent prove he is not an idiot.