David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Synthese 152 (3):321 - 338 (2006)
Since the mid-1970s, scholars have recognized that the skeptical interpretation of Hume’s central argument about induction is problematic. The science of human nature presupposes that inductive inference is justified and there are endorsements of induction throughout Treatise Book I. The recent suggestion that I.iii.6 is confined to the psychology of inductive inference cannot account for the epistemic flavor of its claims that neither a genuine demonstration nor a non-question-begging inductive argument can establish the uniformity principle. For Hume, that inductive inference is justified is part of the data to be explained. Bad argument is therefore excluded as the cause of inductive inference; and there is no good argument to cause it. Does this reinstate the problem of induction, undermining Hume’s own assumption that induction is justified? It does so only if justification must derive from “reason”, from the availability of a cogent argument. Hume rejects this internalist thesis; induction’s favorable epistemic status derives from features of custom, the mechanism that generates inductive beliefs. Hume is attracted to this externalist posture because it provides a direct explanation of the epistemic achievements of children and non-human animals—creatures that must rely on custom unsupplemented by argument.
|Keywords||Hume Induction Reason Externalism Internalism Garrett|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Karl R. Popper (1972). Objective Knowledge. Oxford,Clarendon Press.
Ian Hacking (1995). The Emergence of Probability. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
Don Garrett (1997). Cognition and Commitment in Hume's Philosophy. Oxford University Press.
Colin Howson (2000). Hume's Problem: Induction and the Justification of Belief. Oxford University Press.
Jonathan Francis Bennett (1971). Locke, Berkeley, Hume: Central Themes. Oxford,Clarendon Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Peter Millican (2007). Humes Old and New: Four Fashionable Falsehoods, and One Unfashionable Truth. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 81 (1):163-199.
Peter Millican (2007). Humes Old and New: Four Fashionable Falsehoods, and One Unfashionable Truth. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 81 (1):163–199.
Hsueh Qu (2014). Hume's Positive Argument on Induction. Noûs 48 (4):595-625.
Sean Greenberg (2008). 'Naturalism' and 'Skepticism' in Hume's Treatise of Human Nature. Philosophy Compass 3 (4):721-733.
Similar books and articles
Peter Lipton (2005). Waiting for Hume. In Marina Frasca-Spada & P. J. E. Kail (eds.), Impressions of Hume. Oxford University Press 59.
Peter Lipton (2000). Tracking Track Records, I. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 74 (1):179-205.
Peter Lipton (2000). Tracking Track Records, I. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 74 (1):179–205.
Michael Rowan (1993). Stove on the Rationality of Induction and the Uniformity Thesis. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 44 (3):561-566.
Daniel Steel, What If the Principle of Induction is Normative? Means-Ends Epistemology and Hume's Problem.
John D. Norton (2003). A Material Theory of Induction. Philosophy of Science 70 (4):647-670.
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.
Samir Okasha (2005). Does Hume's Argument Against Induction Rest on a Quantifier-Shift Fallacy? Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 105 (2):253–271.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads105 ( #22,738 of 1,724,892 )
Recent downloads (6 months)7 ( #93,212 of 1,724,892 )
How can I increase my downloads?