At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga.
Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus.
Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
Look up the definition
Inductive reasoning (as opposed to deductive reasoning or abductive reasoning) is reasoning in which the premises seek to supply strong evidence for (not absolute proof of) the truth of the conclusion. While the conclusion of a deductive argument is certain, the truth of the conclusion of an inductive argument is probable, based upon the evidence given.
Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.
In your own words does that mean a specific conclusion?
Try reading it again, and critically look at what the definition says. It jumps around a bit, so you will have to be able to follow when it is talking about each one. If you look closely this is what is says:
Inductive reasoning is to supply strong, probable evidence for the truth, but not absolute or specific proof.
Deductive reasoning is certain/ specific truths.
So, is Inductive reasoning the process of making a specific conclusion?