Other than the chiropractic profession, there is hardly a profession in existence (beside orthodox theology) that places any evidence on deduction. Even medical/health procedure is pretty much focused on the inductive method. Science is king and research seems to be the stepchild of that royalty despite the fact that it entirely negates deduction and emphasizes induction only until new information contradicts and negates the conclusions of present inductive data.
Inductive reasoning is only as strong as (1) the tools used for inherently subjective observations, (2) the level of biases present when making the “inductive leap” to interpret the observations. Therefore, inductive reasoning can only arrive at “probable” conclusions.
Though there will always be a place for deductive reasoning in a world that exists outside our imperfect ability to observe.
Regarding your first point: “Inherently subjective observations” are best memorialized in introduction of the old T.V. program, the “Big Bang Theory.” One of my past students, a young, African man, raised the question in class…”Who banged the bang?” This is answered in John’s gospel in John 1:1-2.
Regarding your second point: If one accepts the passage in John cited and Genesis 1:1, then the Big Bang Theory is an “improbable conclusion.”
Regarding your statement about deductive reasoning: I believe your statement is correct. A further comment might be that our “imperfect ability to observe” includes the Thirty-three Principles of Chiropractic which we accept by faith (belief in the truthfulness of what we were taught by Palmer, et al.) As a believer in Scripture (Divine perspective) I find no contradiction.