Post B2srFkn4mCm9EZTN7g by oantolin@mathstodon.xyz
(DIR) More posts by oantolin@mathstodon.xyz
(DIR) Post #B2siHL64NPrQXR2QCm by futurebird@sauropods.win
2026-02-01T15:27:44Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
What is the difference, if any between "educe" and "infer"?Educe just seems like an obscure and slightly pompous form of "infer" but is there a shade of difference in the meaning of use as you see it?
(DIR) Post #B2siVuss7MRdaHoe8m by maco@wandering.shop
2026-02-01T15:30:18Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird wait there’s a version without the d? I’m only familiar with deduce.
(DIR) Post #B2sieNZtJoCwtRyOwa by futurebird@sauropods.win
2026-02-01T15:31:55Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@maco Deduce is fairly different from "infer" it implies a chain of deductive logic. Infer is softer and more inductive. Maybe. I'm just guessing.
(DIR) Post #B2sip1BwtFDUeJqbFw by huxley@mstdn.social
2026-02-01T15:33:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird I never heard of educe before!Looking up infer and educe, it seems they both have multiple vaguely similar but different meanings, and there are differences between British and American dictionaries.I was always taught that "the speaker implies, the listener infers".
(DIR) Post #B2sipsk9mn4UjlGAQy by PrinceOfDenmark@mas.to
2026-02-01T15:33:57Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird I cheated and looked up the etymology of Educe.I like your description of infer.https://www.etymonline.com/word/educe
(DIR) Post #B2sirbLNRrpNLtUOAK by RogerBW@discordian.social
2026-02-01T15:34:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird I don't think that usage is usefully distinct; I'd use it more in the sense in which it produces "educate", i.e. leading someone out (of a state of ignorance).
(DIR) Post #B2siwKYzGVoGkx6tYe by dlakelan@mastodon.sdf.org
2026-02-01T15:34:35Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebirdI'd bet this is a case of the same ideas entering the language from separate origins. have you looked in an etymology dictionary?
(DIR) Post #B2sj6v3URZzcpWQWB6 by lionelb@expressional.social
2026-02-01T15:36:59Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird I would say that educe is about pulling out different strands until there is sufficient evidence to come to a conclusion.Infer is more about identifying a missing component from the pattern of things which surround it.
(DIR) Post #B2sjBH7kKppKQuUjIW by Moss@beige.party
2026-02-01T15:37:46Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird Educe means “to bring out”, while infer means to logically derive. They can be synonymous. But for example to educe a flavor (on palate) is very different from inferring a flavor (in thought).
(DIR) Post #B2sjCnVPQUbl9WHxEO by freemancrouch@mastodon.social
2026-02-01T15:38:05Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird I gather it means to elicit or tease out information from someone or something, rather than a sequence of steps of inference. But, gosh, I don't recall ever hearing this in the wild, even the academic wild. I'm sticking it straight in the "passive vocabulary" bin.
(DIR) Post #B2sjN5IM8lFtDn5XSi by llewelly@sauropods.win
2026-02-01T15:39:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird well infer has an obvious opposite: outfer, just as multiplication has division. Nobody knows what the opposite of educe is.
(DIR) Post #B2sjTkmmn7zfdlVAjQ by esvrld@normal.style
2026-02-01T15:41:09Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird i don't think i've ever seen 'educe' used in a sentence
(DIR) Post #B2sjeD2oa7qUB7z7gG by RonJeffries@mastodon.social
2026-02-01T15:43:01Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird To me, educe is a drawing out of the result, tugging and pulling away details, while infer is a more forward-going calculation from what's known. Educe is more fine-grained, detailed, infer larger. We educe details of the crime and finally infer that the butler did it.I could be totally off base.
(DIR) Post #B2skarvSkA0RlXW6fA by mason@partychickens.net
2026-02-01T15:53:38Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird I'd have thought someone committed a typo and meant "deduce" and I want to check my OED now, but the online definitions I'm seeing suggest a connotation of process as compared with "infer," which has a far more spontaneous feel.I'll have the OED's opinion presently.
(DIR) Post #B2sl0PvvRRYsTfuqIa by OneInterestingFact@mastodon.ie
2026-02-01T15:58:15Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird educe? perhaps you mean deduce.I would say infer is more formal than deduce - but they essentially mean the same
(DIR) Post #B2slainwkvgTQmUksa by SoftwareTheron@mas.to
2026-02-01T16:04:49Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird "Educe" implies a formal method, to me.
(DIR) Post #B2slbbNxpEa2i7lHW4 by AbyssalRook@mstdn.social
2026-02-01T16:05:01Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird Considering the definition of Educe basically just uses the word 'infer' in it, I'd think the secondary definition (Or the primary one, really) suggests the flavor of inferring going on. "To draw or bring out; elicit. synonym: evoke."I'd use infer to mean internally putting something together and coming to a conclusion, and educe to mean digging out some buried truth.Course in most cases I probably wouldn't use it, because most people would think I typo'd "Deduce".
(DIR) Post #B2sq5rdkM62dcxpUIK by dougwade@mastodon.xyz
2026-02-01T16:55:16Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird if I educe a meaning from a text, I am extracting a meaning that is definitely there. If I infer a meaning from a text, I am injecting a meaning that may or may not be present for other readers. I would be more embarrassed to discover I had educed than inferred an incorrect meaning from a text, because to me educe is the stronger claim.
(DIR) Post #B2srFkn4mCm9EZTN7g by oantolin@mathstodon.xyz
2026-02-01T17:08:12Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird I did not even now that "educe" had a second meaning that was similar to "infer", but you're right it does! Merriam-Webster first lists the meaning I was familiar with: "to bring out (something, such as something latent)". That meaning is very different from "infer" and you cannot substitute "infer" for "educe" when you are using that meaning: "the gift of a puppy finally educed a response from the shy boy", or "...educed order out of chaos" to given example sentences from M-W. Also, the list of synonyms M-W are only for that meaninging of "educe": "evoke, elicit, extract, extort".That was the only meaning I had ever seen used, but M-W also lists "deduce" as a second meaning, which is of course similar to "infer".
(DIR) Post #B2t2mh7EYkdKt9oMXA by outer@mas.to
2026-02-01T19:17:28Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird It rhymes differently. Reduce, definitely. Obtuse, papoose, footloose, almost.
(DIR) Post #B2tF8COydGK1S68Bvc by david42@mastodon.online
2026-02-01T15:48:18Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird I do not recall seeing educe before, and I would treat it today as obsolete or at best obscure for most audiences. On that basis, I would prefer to use words that are more common today such as infer or deduce. Even induction is not as widely understood as deduction, and the distinction between the two is too technical for most audiences. 1/
(DIR) Post #B2tF8IyICs8VpMhTo8 by david42@mastodon.online
2026-02-01T15:49:53Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird All that said, perhaps this question is raised by something you read, or that you are writing for an audience that is likely to know educe, in which latter case have fun! 2/
(DIR) Post #B2tI2nXzufbCmXT01Q by futurebird@sauropods.win
2026-02-01T22:08:30Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@david42 I ran into someone using it and looked it up since I'd never heard it before. Even after looking it up I didn't understand why it would be used over "infer" beyond just for fun. Though I think I get the difference now. If you "infer a result from the evidence" you are doing some inductive reasoning. It makes sense, it's not as airtight as a deduction but it's solid. If you "educe a result from the evidence" you are pulling the evidence to the limit. Like taffy.
(DIR) Post #B2tKEEsuoUgKf2plvE by adardis@mstdn.social
2026-02-01T22:32:55Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird @david42 For fun: in my intro to philosophy courses I used to describe my "duct tape" theory of reasoning. All reasoning is some kind of duct-ion (leading from one thing to another). I did this partly to underscore that the various terms have technical definitions, but they don't have, as it were, popular usage definitions. de-duction is leading from; in-duction is leading in; ab-duction (inference to the best explanation) is leading toward; if there were such a thing as
(DIR) Post #B2tKN6WxF9upMCn03E by futurebird@sauropods.win
2026-02-01T22:34:34Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@adardis @david42 How do you feel about "educe" ?
(DIR) Post #B2tKTfp6wFGsYNPkMC by futurebird@sauropods.win
2026-02-01T22:35:41Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@dhobern @david42 No, I heard a guy say it like five different times. And I checked that's what he meant.
(DIR) Post #B2tKh1Y3TdbxhFnojA by adardis@mstdn.social
2026-02-01T22:34:45Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird @david42 ad-duction it would be leading from. E-duction is also leading from. It definitely has the "feel" of something like ab-duction, getting more out of the data than is actually there. FWIW I've never seen a definition of eduction in any recent writing on logic. 2/2
(DIR) Post #B2tKh2gxE2K9F8yREm by futurebird@sauropods.win
2026-02-01T22:38:09Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
@adardis @david42 I don't really believe any perfect synonyms exist in English. Every word has a slightly different mean OR it get eliminated from disuse.
(DIR) Post #B2tKzIK3qicsvwy8iO by gbargoud@masto.nyc
2026-02-01T22:41:25Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@adardis @david42 @futurebird I would probably count "educe" as being more or less eliminated from disuse
(DIR) Post #B2tOTUncKEgsBBt0j2 by ersatzmaus@mastodon.social
2026-02-01T23:20:30Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird @adardis @david42 curſèd counterexample: flammable and inflammable.
(DIR) Post #B2tObnZaPQTGioHZr6 by futurebird@sauropods.win
2026-02-01T23:22:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ersatzmaus @adardis @david42 That's because people keep using them in the most chaotic ways. It's a horror show.
(DIR) Post #B2tPeFtGCGYt50DiIy by catsalad@infosec.exchange
2026-02-01T23:33:40Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird @adardis @david42 Unless those synonyms are confusing, like inflammable and flammable, THEN they can stay!
(DIR) Post #B2tQuDJbdeJtgGiUrI by adardis@mstdn.social
2026-02-01T23:47:45Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird @ersatzmaus @david42 and hard to teach. Is it possible to *deduce* a theory (like Mendel's gene theory) from the data? No, never: explanations *never* follow deductively from the data.
(DIR) Post #B2tXVhFrsyR2ycDzlo by adardis@mstdn.social
2026-02-01T22:44:09Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird @david42 infer" is "to carry in" (infero, both Latin and Greek)
(DIR) Post #B2tXViEUFavO0caPFw by adardis@mstdn.social
2026-02-01T22:51:57Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird @david42 oh, and my definitions:deductive: strictly logically valid (impossible: true premises and false conclusion);non-deductive: not valid but provides some kind of truth-relevant supportabductive: inference to the best explanation;inductive: non-deductive and not abductive. I.e., "all the rest": sampling arguments, arguments from analogy, maybe there are others
(DIR) Post #B2tXVjGIQLxxCWRMiO by david42@mastodon.online
2026-02-02T00:58:18Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird @adardis For those needing a longer explanation of abduction, Wikipedia has a good one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoning
(DIR) Post #B2tXVkLIPFYkYJms9A by futurebird@sauropods.win
2026-02-02T01:01:44Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@david42 @adardis So... it's like gently asserting and assuming the converse due to probability?eg "the lawn is wet therefore it probably rained because that's normally how it gets wet... "
(DIR) Post #B2tYWRDZ63xlTx45FQ by david42@mastodon.online
2026-02-02T01:12:39Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@futurebird I really don't think educe is a word in modern English. It's an archaic Latinism from an age educated English writers learned Latin, conducted formal and/or high status activities in Latin, and wrote high status early modern English prose with a great variety of words borrowed from Latin, only some of which survived into English as it is today.
(DIR) Post #B2tZn5OTahvOfnfeDI by david42@mastodon.online
2026-02-02T01:26:30Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@adardis @futurebird Yes, exactly.