#problem of induction

[raglanphd]

[rafanofficial]

❝ [বিজ্ঞানের] যে-কোনো ভৌততত্ত্ব সব সময়ই সাময়িক। এক অর্থে—একটি অনুকল্প মাত্র। আপনি কখনোই একে প্রমাণ করতে পারবেন না। পরীক্ষা-নিরীক্ষার ফল যতবারই কোনো তত্ত্বের পক্ষে যাক-না কেন, পরের বার ফল যে বিরুদ্ধে যাবে না—এর কোনো নিশ্চয়তা নেই। অপর দিকে, তত্ত্বের পূর্বাভাস-বিরোধী একটিমাত্র পর্যবেক্ষণও তত্ত্বটিকে ভুল প্রমাণ করতে পারে। ... নতুন পর্যবেক্ষণ তত্ত্বের বিপরীতে গেলে তত্ত্বটিকে হয় বাদ দিতে হবে অথবা বদলে দিতে হবে। ❞

Stephen Hawking (1988), A Brief History of Time (New York : Bantam Books) p. 10

[splintersfeelings]

An Ode to David Hume

Correlation isn't causation Even if causation corelates to correlation Causation doesn't cause correlation But the cause of causation is unknown, Since we only understand it through correlation

Causation is constant conjunction and constant conjunction is causation, that is all Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know

We’re nothing but induction

[wittgensteining]

making inductive leaps and coming up with an ad hoc hypothesis every other second

[nicolae]

SetThings - Problem of induction

https://www.setthings.com/en/problem-of-induction/

Problem of induction

The problem of induction (also: Humean problem or Hume problem) is a basic problem of epistemology. It relates to the question of whether and when a conclusion by inducing individual cases to a generally applicable law is permissible. It was first mentioned by David Hume around 1740 . Although the problem of induction was … Read More

[nicolae]

SetThings - Falsifiability

https://www.setthings.com/en/falsifiability/

Falsifiability

Falsifiability (also referred to as the use of refutability) was introduced by Karl Popper and is considered an important concept in epistemology, allowing to draw a line between scientific theories and those that are not. An assertion, a hypothesis, is … Read More

[bygone]

Problem of Induction

Aristotle had hoped that first principles could be discovered through *induction*. An inductive inference is the generalization that results from counting individual objects or events. The */Problem of Induction/* is the realization that we can never know /how many/ individuals or events we /need/ to count before we are /justified/ in making the generalization. Francis Bacon believed that…

View On WordPress

[philosophezerker]

PHILOSOPHY: The (Not Actually A) Problem of Induction

As a semi-evil Viking badass, I have raided many monasteries. They have always been filled with gold and precious objects. Thus, as I am sailing in my longboat, and see what appears to be a monastery, I naturally make the assumption that THIS monastery is also full of gold.

That is inductive reasoning. Based on it, I decide to set sail for the monastery.

Upon arriving, my viking raiders and I crash open the door. A kilted Scotsman stands there. It is none other than DAVID HUME.

“Fool!” he says. “Just because all the monasteries you have raided thus far have been full of gold doesn’t GUARANTEE that this one will be. In fact, maybe this one is full of heavily armored mounted knights who are going to ride out and crush you and your Viking raiders. Inductive reasoning is not rational!”

“But,” I protest, “reasoning based on the past has worked out pretty well so far!”

“AHA!” he says. “You see what you did there!?! You just used inductive reasoning to defend itself! That is circular! You know nothing!”

“So what you are saying is that just because I hit someone in the head with a hammer in the past and it crushed his skull, I cannot know for certain that it will do so now?”

“Correct!”

“Huh,” I say then I crush his skull with a hammer, loot the monastery, and sail on my merry way.