Phil Discussion

Phil Discussion - (can’t look to the past for...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Phil Discussion February 13, 2008 Induction/ inductive reasoning : Science-based, contrasted with deductive. The way we do it, is we look at the past to figure out what will happen in the future by inductive reasoning. -Chalk falling to table example. A skeptic about induction will question the assumption we make when you’re doing induction, the assumption that there is uniformity with nature. The idea that things in the future are gonna be like things in the past. Criticism/skeptic : how do you know for certain that things are gonna be in the future as they were in the past. Response : Look, skeptic, I never said anything about things being certain. Probably things in the future will be like they were in the past, I could be wrong but I’m probably not. Skepti’s next move: Cant define induction with induction.
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: (can’t look to the past for justification and beliefs of what will happen in the future) Straight rule of induction: If the proportion of hitherto observed As that are B is X/y then assume that as number of observed a’s reaches infinity the proportion of as that are b will appreoach x/y 1. either there is a limiting frequency…or there isn’t 2. if there is a limitimg frequency, then the SRI works 3. if no limiting frequency, then nothing works therefore you should use the sri. If everything in universe chaotic, we cannot predict future, but it seems like universe is gerneally predictable. If universe is insane way all bets are off. If universe is predictable, then induction is the way to go. Essay: email Luka about getting the email....
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online