David Hume Induction Argument

638 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Hume’s problem of induction essay

Induction is the practice of drawing general conclusions based on particular experiences. While this approach is important to empiricism and the scientific method, there is always something uncertain about it, because we may get new data that are different and that challenge our previous conclusions. The principle of induction teaches us that we can predict the future based on what has happened in the past, which we cannot. There is a premise that says that the only way to justify induction would be to give a deductive argument or to give and inductive argument. However, according to Hume, there is not a deductive argument that can do this task. Hume’s supports this by saying that a conclusion that is false is likely to contradict the truth …show more content…

The first justification is functional: It is only logical that the future must resemble the past. Hume pointed out that we could just as easily imagine a world of chaos, so logic cannot guarantee our inductions. The second justification is that we can assume that something will continue to happen because it has always happened before. To Hume, this kind of reasoning is circular and lacks a foundation in reason. So what is wrong with this circularity? It seems that if you could justify inductive reasoning inductively, why then couldn’t people look into the future to justify the process of looking into the future to gain information? Or, using the very same “inductive” evidence that you have that counter-inductive reasoning does not work, why couldn’t a person using counter-inductive reasoning counter-inductively justify the counter-inductive method? Someone using inductive reasoning would draw from this the conclusion that inductive reasoning will always work better than counter-inductive reasoning, a person using counter-inductive reasoning would draw the opposite conclusion: that counter-inductive reasoning is now more likely than ever before to be more successful than inductive

Show More
Related

  • Hume's and Anscombe's View on Causation

    1237 Words  | 3 Pages

    ...th philosophers have strong support for their claims, it seems to me that Anscombe’s argument for causation is the better one. It is evident that Hume’s argument holds flaws, or else he would have not introduced his counterfactual theory; and as a result I must resort to Anscombe. Unlike Hume, Anscombe does not make such strong claims (as to what causation is and how it functions) which allows room for her idea of causation to adapt to different circumstances. For example, Anscombe’s position on causation is unaffected if event A leads to event C, because all one has to say is that there was an interference. In addition, Anscombe’s position is more intuitive than Hume’s position on causation. For example, our common sense tells us that events are caused, not conjoined as Hume claims it to be. For these reasons I believe that Anscombe’s argument succeds that of Hume.

    Read More

  • The Raven's Paradox

    1354 Words  | 3 Pages

    ...ion. Hempel’s solution provides to give a reason as to how induction can lead to confirmation and how the logical gap can be filled through the use of logically equivalent statements. However, his view and answer to the paradox prove to be a stretch and lead to the issue of common sense being broken and illogical observations being made to confirm the hypothesis. Good successfully brings attention to this rather blatant error on the part of Hempel to eventually lead to the Raven paradox being invalid. Not only is Good effective in highlighting errors within Hempel’s solution, but Popper, Scheffler, and Goodman are all equally successful in negating individual parts of Hempel’s argument as well. In the end, it is the addition of all these counterarguments that prove to exhibit that Hempel is unsuccessful in trying to come up with a valid answer to the raven paradox.

    Read More

  • Probabilist - Deductive Inference in Gassendi's Logic

    3534 Words  | 8 Pages

    Milton, J. R. "Induction before Hume," British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 38 (1987): 49-74.

    Read More

  • David Hume on the Existence of Miracles

    1462 Words  | 3 Pages

    ... and faith are not based solely on empirical evidence and absolute proof. It is the will to believe, the desire to see miracles that allows the faithful, to believe in the existence of miracles, not on any kind of sufficient evidence but on the belief that miracles can happen. Rather than Hume’s premise that a wise man proportions his belief in response to the eviddence, maybe a wise man would be better off, tempering his need for empirical evidence against his faith and his will to belief.

    Read More

  • David Hume and Future Occurrences

    1020 Words  | 3 Pages

    In An Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding, David Hume demonstrates how there is no way to rationally make any claims about future occurrences. According to Hume knowledge of matters of fact come from previous experience. From building on this rationale, Hume goes on to prove how, as humans we can only make inferences on what will happen in the future, based on our experiences of the past. But he points out that we are incorrect to believe that we are justified in using our experience of the past as a means of evidence of what will happen in the future. Since we have only experience of the past, we can only offer propositions of the future. Hume classifies human into two categories; “Relations of Ideas,” and “Matters of Fact.” (240) “Relations of ideas” are either intuitively or demonstratively certain, such as in Mathematics (240). It can be affirmed that 2 + 2 equals 4, according to Hume’s “relations of ideas.” “Matters of fact” on the other hand are not ascertained in the same manner as “Relations of Ideas.” The ideas that are directly caused by impressions are called "matters of fact". With “matters of fact,” there is no certainty in establishing evidence of truth since every contradiction is possible. Hume uses the example of the sun rising in the future to demonstrate how as humans, we are unjustified in making predictions of the future based on past occurrences. As humans, we tend to use the principle of induction to predict what will occur in the future. Out of habit, we assume that sun will rise every day, like it has done in the past, but we have no basis of actual truth to make this justification. By claiming that the sun will rise tomorrow according to Hume is not false, nor is it true. Hume illustrates that “the contrary of every matter of fact is still possible, because it can never imply a contradiction and is conceived by the mind with the same facility and distinctness as if ever so conformable to reality” (240). Just because the sun has risen in the past does not serve as evidence for the future. Thus, according to Hume, we are only accurate in saying that there is a fifty- percent chance that the sun will rise tomorrow. Hume felt that all reasoning concerning matter of fact seemed to be founded on the relation between cause and effect.

    Read More

  • Bacon's Theory Of Bacon Analysis

    835 Words  | 2 Pages

    Bacon dedicated his philosophical writings to putting forth arguments for induction, and empirical methods, which persist today and are widely used in modern science. He would argue that the authority of natural science comes from empirical observations and the usefulness of the axioms that are extrapolated from those observations. In essence, the authority of science, according to Bacon, stems from his method of “true and perfect induction.” All other methods would be subject to opinion and error of interpretation. One cannot start at general axioms, they have to start from specific and interpret their way to general axioms, and therefore induction is essential for the accurate interpretation of nature.

    Read More

  • Hume's Argument Of Skepticism

    2329 Words  | 5 Pages

    Hume’s argument for inductive scepticism in the Enquiry starts with a division of the things that we think about and a realization of the limitations of our perceptions.

    Read More

  • Problem of Induction

    1208 Words  | 3 Pages

    In the selection, ‘Skeptical doubts concerning the operations of the understanding’, David Hume poses a problem for knowledge about the world. This question is related to the problem of induction. David Hume was one of the first who decided to analyze this problem. He starts the selection by providing his form of dividing the human knowledge, and later discusses reasoning and its dependence on experience. Hume states that people believe that the future will resemble the past, but we have no evidence to support this belief. In this paper, I will clarify the forms of knowledge and reasoning and examine Hume’s problem of induction, which is a challenge to Justified True Belief account because we lack a justification for our beliefs.

    Read More

  • David Hume's Problem Of Uniformity Of Knowledge

    1156 Words  | 3 Pages

    So if the premise are true and the conclusion ties to the logic of the premise then the conclusion is necessary true. An example of deductive reasoning is as follows; If all men are mortal and Joe is a man, then Joe must be a mortal. The premises in this example establish that Joe is mortal simply because he is classified as a man whose members are all considered mortals. Deductive reasoning is based on facts and logic and statements given to us. The difference between the two are that deduction is the use of logic and facts to determine the end where as induction uses examples and patterns to determine the conclusion. Hume believed that Deduction as well as induction were the only methods of obtaining knowledge however, according to his philosophy, there was a problem with these

    Read More

  • A Comparison of Sir Frances Bacon’s Induction and Euclid's Deduction

    895 Words  | 2 Pages

    Bacon introduced a new system of “true and perfect” induction which he proposed as both the essential foundation of scientific method and also a necessary tool for the proper interpretation of nature. Bacon although an analytic, designed this new method to differ from the classical methods of induction Aristotle and other philosophers formed. “As Bacon explains it, classic induction proceeds “at once from . . . sense and particulars up to the most general propositions” and then works backward (via deduction) to arrive at intermediate propositions.” (Simpson) One major mistake Bacon noticed with the classic method of induction philosophers such as Aristotle formed was that if general principle proves false, all the intermediate principles could prove false as well. “And, though these affections are necessary as various as are individual conditions, yet the method must be such that the ultimate conclusion of every man shall be the same, or would be the same if inquiry were sufficiently persisted in.” (Peirce) One contradicti...

    Read More

  • The Scientific Account of Inductivism vs. Falsificationism: Is Science Objective?

    931 Words  | 2 Pages

    I further this opinion of Popper; nothing in science can be seen as an unquestionable truth. It is illogical for any singular statement to be considered a universal statement. By analogy, it is illogical to presume all dogs are brown because, through observation, you’ve only ever seen brown dogs. This logic predisposes science for failure. An excellent example of such is the paradigm shift away from Newtonian physics in light of Einstein’s discoveries. Einstein presented a new context for motion that was otherwise not considered by Newton. The fact is that almost every scientific ‘truth’ to be presented throughout history has been falsified, which is an inherent flaw within the notion of induction.

    Read More

  • The Theory Of Induction And Induction

    1105 Words  | 3 Pages

    In answering the above question I would firstly clarify it 's meaning or my interpretation of it. My argument is not based on the question of whether induction itself is rational, as in is it a logical process. The answer to that question is no, however can it be rationally justified? in other words can a rational argument be made to justify its use in relation to acquiring knowledge I will argue that yes it can. Furthermore I will argue that this is indeed what Hume meant when he made the distinction between applying induction as an agent and logically critiquing induction from the perspective of the philosopher. I will begin by explaining induction and deduction, how both methods of inference are applied by humankind and within nature and what separates them. From there I will underline the issues when attempting to justify induction and present my argument as to why it can be rationally justified. In doing so I will show how Hume 's critical assessment of induction, whilst presenting its shortcomings, also acknowledges its unavoidable function.

    Read More

  • The Differences Between Induction And Deduction

    1452 Words  | 3 Pages

    In this we essay will briefly look at the differences between induction and deduction. We will then examine Hume’s problem of induction and popular approaches to solving the problem. Finally we will consider whether Hume’s problem warrants our concern, does scientific advancement require induction to proceed or does it proceed deductively?

    Read More

  • David Hume's Theory of Knowledge

    1350 Words  | 3 Pages

    Empiricism (en- peiran; to try something for yourself): The doctrine that all knowledge must come through the senses; there are no innate ideas born within us that only require to be remembered (ie, Plato). All knowledge is reducible to sensation, that is, our concepts are only sense images. In short, there is no knowledge other than that obtained by sense observation.

    Read More

  • That Which is Accepted as Knowledge Today is Sometimes Discarded Tomorrow

    1367 Words  | 3 Pages

    The use of inductive reasoning in the natural sciences means that, through the scientific method, a general case can be defined from a specific case. This often leads to knowledge being discarded, as the knowledge does not fully describe the general case. In physics when learning about astrophysics, and models of the universe, we learnt about Newton’s model of the universe and Olber’s Paradox. I found it particularly interesting how the knowledge was being changed, and what was believed to be true was pro...

    Read More

More about David Hume Induction Argument

Open Document