You must have Credits on your Balance to download this sample
Pages 9 (2259 words)
If one is right claiming that our scientific principles are, at best, inductive generalisations that are derived from sets of particular scientific judgments, then those scientific principles, at best, cannot be known to be universal and at worst, are entirely without merit.
This paper discusses the problem of induction and how it impacts current knowledge and approach to science. This discussion revolves primarily around works of David Hume and Karl Popper due to the former theorising on induction more than any other philosopher and the latter revealing inapplicability of induction for science and scientific method.
Alan Musgrave (2004) in his critique of induction problem introduces Hume's argument as the basis for understanding the dilemma. Musgrave distinguishes Hume's three points, namely: (1) we reason, and must reason, inductively; (2) inductive reasoning is logically invalid and (3) to reason in a logically invalid way is irrational. Thus, the problem of induction is a problem confronted by scientists and philosophers concerned with science, but more specifically it is a problem for scientific method. Furthermore, it is a problem for the practice of science, for scientific endeavor, and it is a problem for the procedures of science. From the critical perspective, as science is or ought to be, it faces and must solve the problem of induction.
David Hume created a philosophical system to explain his understanding of human nature. He provided a solid non-metaphysical explanation of the nature of human thought to use as a foundation to his philosophy. As an empiricist, Hume believed our knowledge is of the phenomenal world and is gained through experience. ...
Not exactly what you need?