Graduate studies at Western
History and Philosophy of Logic 29 (4):361-376 (2008)
|Abstract||In this essay, my aim is twofold: to clarify how the late Mill conceived of the certainty of inductive generalizations and to offer a systematic clarification of the limited domain of application of the Mill’s Canons of Induction. I shall argue that Mill’s views on the certainty of knowledge changed overtime and that this change was accompanied by a new view on the certainty of the inductive results yielded by the Canons of Induction. The key message of the later editions of The System of Logic as conceived by the late Mill was no longer that by the Canons of Induction we can establish scientific certainty and true causes, but rather that the Canons are useful in establishing causal laws in a provisional way.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
John V. Strong (1978). John Stuart Mill, John Herschel, and the 'Probability of Causes'. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1978:31 - 41.
Chris Fraser, Mohist Canons. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
John Stuart Mill (1950/2005). Philosophy of Scientific Method. Dover Publications.
Harold T. Walsh (1962). Whewell and Mill on Induction. Philosophy of Science 29 (3):279-284.
Kenneth S. Friedman (1975). Another Shot at the Canons of Induction. Mind 84 (334):177-191.
John S. Wilkins (forthcoming). Biological Essentialism and the Tidal Change of Natural Kinds. Science and Education.
A. C. Genova (1967). Inquiry as a Transcendental Activity. Inquiry 10 (1-4):1 – 20.
Steven Rappaport (1996). Inference to the Best Explanation: Is It Really Different From Mill's Methods? Philosophy of Science 63 (1):65-80.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads18 ( #74,535 of 734,153 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,087 of 734,153 )
How can I increase my downloads?