According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2012), “An inductive logic is an evidential support system that extends deductive logic to less than certain inferences….in a good inductive argument the premises should provide some degree of support for the conclusion, where such support means that the truth of the premises indicates with some degree of strength that the conclusion is true” When we take a look at Fisher's argument, we can find inductive reasoning. For example, at the beginning of his speech, he introduces the fact of HIV/AIDS with a specific example; “The reality of AIDS is brutally clear. Two hundred thousand Americans are dead or dying; a million more are infected. In the next few years there will be forty million, sixty or one hundred million infections throughout the world” (Fisher, 1992). Since this sentence proves it, it proves the specific number of people who will be affected by HIV/AIDS. After this sentence, he warns that everyone can potentially contract HIV/AIDS. She states that “This is not a distant threat. It is a current danger. The infection rate is increasing most rapidly among women and children” (Fisher, 1992). He then describes that it is important to learn from Fisher's lesson and in conclusion speaks to future generations about HIV/AIDS: “Learn with me the lessons of history and grace, so my children will not be afraid to say the word 'AIDS' when I'll be gone. So, their children and yours may not need to whisper it at all” (Fisher, 1992). I believe that this structure of Fisher's argument is inductive reasoning. At the beginning of his speech, he uses a specific example and shows that a number of people are affected by AIDS/HIV. Furthermore, after his speech, he states that everyone has the potential to contract HIV/AIDS due to a certain number of people being infected. At the end, he describes the importance of telling children and