"The defender is like a tractor. Those wheels are gay on the defender. Therefore, logic says this is as gay as putting chrome wheels on a tractor."
Question: Would that be inductive reasoning?
1.) Defender is like tractor.
2.) Chrome wheels on a defender is gay.
3.) Becuase a tractor is like a defender it would be as gay to put them a tractor?
Seems a little out of order to be inductive...I think I am just reading it incorrectly..
Deductive would go like this, right?
1.) Chrome wheels are gay on a Defender.
2.) Chrome wheels are gay on a tractor.
3.) Therefore a Defender is like a tractor.
Sorry about how off topic this is but it is bothering me.