What is the problem of Induction?

Question

Help!

Answer 1

If you're talking about the Problem of Induction made famous by the philosopher David Hume, it is something like this.

Hume believed there are some truths that are a priori -- they require no observation to know, such as "There are no married bachelors," for example. These things are certain to be true, but they're basically trivial. They don't give us any real information that isn't already contained in the meanings of the words.

Other things are a posteriori -- they require observation, such as "John is a bachelor." This is quite contentful and tells us a lot about the world. However, any information you get justifying this idea would necessarily be inductive, since it's derived from the senses.

There's the problem. All inductively justified ideas, Hume believed, must of course use induction. All inductive arguments are in some way dependent upon the "principle of the uniformity of nature" -- that nature has regular, unchanging laws and the future will pretty much be like the past. So suppose the local weatherperson makes a prediction that it will be sunny tomorrow. S/he is doing so based on the information currently at hand as well as what has happened in similar situations in the past. So the inference presupposes that the future will in fact be like the past.

However, why should we think the principle of the uniformity of nature is true? In order to justify it, it must either be a priori -- which it is not -- or a posteriori -- which it is. But in order to argue inductively for the idea that nature is uniform and the future will be like the past, we must use the very idea we're trying to argue for to justify it.

So perhaps induction isn't justified as a method, since any argument made for it is circular -- it must presuppose what it is trying to prove.

Answer 2

induction is extremely questionable, that is totally usually constrained to the empirical information that we are in a position to assemble on the 2d. that's why for many centuries europeans theory that one and all human beings are white to rather tan - they had not considered africans nor nearby human beings. then, while europeans chanced on black human beings, they weren't considered human in any respect. hence induction is often basically a wager. that's the main smart and primitive occasion, in technology that is far greater complicated. as an occasion (returned, a marginally common one) Freud had fairly a brilliant number of sufferers and utilising them as information and lab-rats of variety, he superior his theories approximately parental effect on newborn psyche and many others. on the time freudism gave the impression to be the perfect theory, consistently dazzling, all the secrets and methods of human psyche have been got here upon. after some many years scientists held super scale experiments and got here upon that Freuds claims are infrequently ever the case. that's precisely why majority of his theories have been falsified. concern of induction is a concern for many centuries already.

Answer 3

the problem with induction is that magnetic fields are subject to all kinds of interference in the operating environment and variables in the manufacture of the inductor. they are also fairly expensive when compared to other electronic parts. it is possible to produce DC power by means of induction but the equipment used is vulnerable to lightning.

Answer 4

the problem of Induction is because it must be induced

Answer 5

Your argument isnt as solid because you arent arriving at your conclusion with information contained in your premises.

Answer 6

Given examples of inputs and outputs, find the function f(x).