 The first, still closely linked to analogical arguments, is the confirmation of scientific hypotheses. Confirmation is the process by which a scientific hypothesis receives inductive support on the basis of evidence (see  evidence,  confirmation, and  Bayes’ Theorem).  Confirmation may also signify the logical relationship of inductive support that obtains between a hypothesis \(H\) and a proposition \(E\) that expresses the relevant evidence. Can analogical arguments play a role, either in the process or in the logical relationship? Arguably yes (to both), but this role has to be delineated carefully, and several obstacles remain in the way of a clear account.