The Paradox of Induction
DOWNLOAD
FREE
|
Hume and the formulation of the paradox of induction
Equations are omitted for technical reasons - download the original pdf
Let us digress briefly to consider the difference between Hume's formulation of the paradox of induction and the formulation in the modern context, as illustrated by the passage from Russell. Hume did not believe that any knowledge of a cognitive or conscious kind was strictly possible. He maintained that we are forced by the mechanical nature of our minds to believe certain things. We are conditioned by our environment and the structure of our minds to believe that nature is uniform. The difficulty is that many modern philosophers are not content with this solution to the problem. They wish to demonstrate that science is cognitive knowledge, and that the laws of nature are not just beliefs that are conditioned into us, but true descriptions of a uniform nature arrived at through sound processes of reasoning. The paradox in the modern context is the problem that such processes of reasoning appear to be fundamentally unsound. Hume's answer is a potential solution to the paradox of induction. It solves the problem by dissolving it – he says that instinctively we must reason inductively, and since we are forced to expect the uniformity of nature from past uniformities, there is little point attempting to justify it. This answer of Hume's is reflected in Russell's introduction to the paradox which we have just seen, when he writes, "Experience has shown us that, hitherto, the frequent repetition of some uniform succession or coexistence has been a cause of our expecting the same succession or coexistence on the next occasion." Russell acknowledges that past uniformities may cause us to expect future uniformities, but he wants to demonstrate that past uniformities prove that the future will be uniform, and that is his problem. Thus, it is seems that many philosophers wish to maintain that science is true, justified knowledge, and hence they find the paradox of induction disturbing. It is also worth remarking that Hume, in proposing the paradox of induction, was not intending to cause problems for science. He was endeavouring to undermine the rationalism of Descartes. Descartes claimed that he could derive the whole body of current physics from the existence of God by reason alone. In other words, according to Descartes, science does not require any experiment whatsoever. Hume is (correctly) demonstrating that knowledge of scientific generalisations derives from observation and not from reason.
|
Contents of
The Paradox of Induction
1 Prescriptive philosophy of science
2 The problem or paradox of induction
3 Hume and the formulation of the paradox of induction
4 Attempts to solve the paradox of induction
5 The paradox of induction and the claim that probability is all we ought to seek
6 Swinburn and confirmation theory
7 Falsificationism and the paradox of induction
8 Extrapolation and interpolation
9 Occam razor and the paradox of induction
|
