Noûs 48 (4):595-625 (2014)

Authors
Hsueh Qu
National University of Singapore
Abstract
Discussion on whether Hume's treatment of induction is descriptive or normative has usually centred on Hume's negative argument, somewhat neglecting the positive argument. In this paper, I will buck this trend, focusing on the positive argument. First, I argue that Hume's positive and negative arguments should be read as addressing the same issues . I then argue that Hume's positive argument in the Enquiry is normative in nature; drawing on his discussion of scepticism in Section 12 of the Enquiry, I explain a framework by which he provides what I call consequent justification for our inductive practices in his positive argument. Based on this, I argue that his negative argument in the Enquiry should similarly be read as normative in nature
Keywords Hume  Induction  Internalism
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/nous.12015
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 52,855
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Sources of Normativity.Christine M. Korsgaard - 1996 - Cambridge University Press.
The Skeptic and the Dogmatist.James Pryor - 2000 - Noûs 34 (4):517–549.
What's Wrong with Moore's Argument?James Pryor - 2004 - Philosophical Issues 14 (1):349–378.
Hume.Barry Stroud - 2016 - Philosophical Review 125 (4):597-601.
(Anti-)Sceptics Simple and Subtle: G. E. Moore and John McDowell.Crispin Wright - 2002 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 65 (2):330-348.

View all 37 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Hume’s Practically Epistemic Conclusions?Hsueh Qu - 2014 - Philosophical Studies 170 (3):501-524.
Laying Down Hume's Law.Hsueh Qu - 2019 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 100 (1):24-46.
Hume's Internalist Epistemology in EHU 12.Hsueh Qu - 2018 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 96 (3):517-539.
Prescription, Description, and Hume's Experimental Method.Hsueh Qu - 2016 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 24 (2):279-301.
Hume's Epistemology: The State of the Question.Hsueh M. Qu - 2019 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 57 (3):301-323.

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Stove on the Rationality of Induction and the Uniformity Thesis.Michael Rowan - 1993 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 44 (3):561-566.
Waiting for Hume.Peter Lipton - 2005 - In Marina Frasca-Spada & P. J. E. Kail (eds.), Impressions of Hume. Oxford University Press. pp. 59.
Probability and Hume's Inductive Scepticism.D. C. Stove - 1973 - Oxford, UK: Oxford, Clarendon Press.
Belief in Miracles: Tillotson's Argument Against Transubstantiation as a Model for Hume. [REVIEW]Michael Levine - 1988 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 23 (3):125 - 160.
Hume’s Arguments for His Sceptical Doubts.Dan Passell - 1997 - Journal of Philosophical Research 22:409-422.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2013-03-01

Total views
116 ( #79,344 of 2,342,679 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #515,081 of 2,342,679 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes