Philosophy 77 (1):67-86 (2002)
|Abstract||In this paper I offer a straight solution to Hume's problem of induction by defusing the assumptions on which it is based. I argue that Hume's problem only arises if we accept (i) that there is no necessity but logical necessity, or (ii) that it is unreasonable to believe that there is any form of necessity in addition to logical necessity. I show that Hume's arguments in favour of (i) and (ii) are unsound. I then offer a suggestion as to how the weakness of his arguments has escaped detection. Finally, having claimed that there remains a surmountable problem with inductive arguments, I end by characterising that problem and a possible approach to its solution.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Daniel Steel (2011). On Not Changing the Problem: A Reply to Howson. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 25 (3):285 - 291.
Daniel Steel & S. Kedzie Hall (2011). What If the Principle of Induction Is Normative? Formal Learning Theory and Hume's Problem. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 24 (2):171-185.
Alan Musgrave (2004). How Popper [Might Have] Solved the Problem of Induction. Philosophy 79 (1):19-31.
William Todd (1964). Counterfactual Conditionals and the Presuppositions of Induction. Philosophy of Science 31 (2):101-110.
Daniel Steel, What If the Principle of Induction is Normative? Means-Ends Epistemology and Hume's Problem.
John Hosack (1991). On Probabilism and Induction. Topoi 10 (2):227-229.
Chris Tucker (2009). Evidential Support, Reliability, and Hume's Problem of Induction. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 90 (4):503-519.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads80 ( #9,700 of 549,013 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,272 of 549,013 )
How can I increase my downloads?