Induction is a different method of logic, and a new way of investigating truth. Bacon does not exactly claim to have invented it himself but does stress its neglect in previous centuries. Unlike the syllogism, which was the dominant logical form after Aristotle, induction begins with natural phenomena and works through a series of intermediate steps to arrive at general axioms or statements about nature. Bacon argues that his method improves upon the syllogism because it begins with concrete things and natures, rather than with words, which can be ambiguous. Also, induction refrains from producing general statements immediately, which serve to confirm impressions already held.

Induction is very different from the modern "scientific" method of testing hypotheses (or guesses) through experiments, but it represents an important development in scientific method. It is important to remember that Bacon himself did not necessarily consider his work to be "science," but rather natural philosophy. Seeing induction only as an inferior version of modern methods is a mistake. Nevertheless, scholars have criticized Bacon's method on several grounds. Mary Hesse argues that Bacon underestimates the importance of hypotheses, and that his method depends on there being a finite number of things with finite natures to be investigated. One could also argue against his assumption that a complete knowledge of nature is necessary for induction to take place; modern scientists and philosophers are far less confident about the possibility for total knowledge.