Search type Search syntax
Tags [tag]
Exact "words here"
Author user:1234
user:me (yours)
Score score:3 (3+)
score:0 (none)
Answers answers:3 (3+)
answers:0 (none)
isaccepted:yes
hasaccepted:no
inquestion:1234
Views views:250
Sections title:apples
body:"apples oranges"
URL url:"*.example.com"
Favorites infavorites:mine
infavorites:1234
Status closed:yes
duplicate:no
migrated:no
wiki:no
Types is:question
is:answer
Exclude -[tag]
-apples
For more details on advanced search visit our help page
Results tagged with Search options answers only user 5759
1
vote
Induction is impossible. Explanations don't follow from observations. The explanations cover unobserved events and explain what you see in terms of stuff you have not observed and may be unable to … nothing about the substance of those laws. As a result it can't be used to figure out what the laws are. Nor can it be used to predict the future. So how is knowledge created without induction? You …
answered Jun 11 '16 by alanf
3
votes
Whenever we make some claim about the world, the phenomena, whatever you want to call it, we necessarily draw from our immediate and past experience, i.e. we engage in any act of induction in the … most general sense. That's why there is no problem of induction, its necessary to any knowledge in the first place. If you define induction as "absolutely any process by which people come up with …
answered Sep 16 by alanf
1
vote
There is a difference between prejudice and inductive reasoning. It is possible for a person to be prejudiced, it is not possible for a person to do inductive reasoning. Induction is supposed to be … actually created by noticing problems, guessing solutions to them and then criticising the guesses. The above criticisms of induction were proposed by Karl Popper and improved by David Deutsch: see …
answered Mar 6 '17 by alanf
1
vote
You don't use induction, because induction is impossible: Deduction vs Induction -- are they equally valid? Some deduction may be involved in working out the consequences of existing biological …
answered Apr 13 '17 by alanf
0
votes
Your question is a bad question because induction is impossible and no principle of the uniformity of nature can save it. Why is induction impossible? Explanations do not follow from observations in … anywhere. Justification is impossible, so induction is impossible. In reality all knowledge is created by conjecture and criticism. You notice a problem with your current ideas, propose solutions …
answered Jun 24 '14 by alanf
2
votes
Whenever I see inductive arguments being used, it seems as though they can be redone by simply making certain assumptions and rephrasing the argument as a deduction from those assumptions. For …
answered Dec 11 '18 by alanf
0
votes
Some people say that you can reach conclusions about whether some specific event will happen by induction. They are wrong. Induction is impossible. No knowledge has even been created by induction … . Nor will any knowledge ever be created by induction. Explanations do not follow from observations in any sense. Nor do observations prove any idea. Nor can any observation make any idea one jot more …
answered Aug 19 '14 by alanf
0
votes
I don't know what the author of the book you cite means. However, induction is impossible and unnecessary as pointed out be Karl Popper, see "Realism and the Aim of Science" especially chapter I … solutions to the problem and criticising the solutions until only one is left and it has no known criticisms. No induction is necessary to guess and criticise guesses, so no induction is necessary for …
answered Oct 12 '16 by alanf
1
vote
But it is not entirely clear to me whether the problem is induction or inductivism? By 'induction', I mean, for example, that we observe that the non-trivial zeros of the Riemann Zeta function … hypothesis based on other scientific methods (that is, not by simply finding more zeros in the same interval which would be inductivism). That is, induction is only part of the chain, the part that leads …
answered Feb 9 '16 by alanf
0
votes
Induction in the sense that philosophers talk about it is the idea that ideas are derived from observations in some sense and can be proven or made more probable by observations. Induction in the … philosopher's sense is impossible. (I will discuss mathematical induction below.) Explanations do not follow from observations in any sense. Nor do observations prove any idea. Nor can any observation …
answered Jul 21 '14 by alanf
1
vote
Induction is a process that allegedly allows you to get theories from experimental evidence and then show they are true or probable or something like that. As Karl Popper pointed out, induction is …
answered May 20 '14 by alanf
1
vote
The problem of induction discovered by the Scottish philosopher David Hume is quite well known. Induction is allegedly a process that starts with observations, uses them to derive a theory and … then shows the theory is true or probable or good or something similarly vague. The problem of induction is that such a process is impossible. Any set of observations is compatible with an infinite set …
answered Jan 4 by alanf
-1
votes
Inductivism claims that a process called induction can help scientists invent theories and show they are true or probably true or good or something like that. There is no mention of refuting theories … . So induction is not supposed to be a means of refuting theories and replacing them with better ideas. As Popper explained, no such process exists. …
answered Feb 17 '17 by alanf
2
votes
resembles the past. As such, this idea is irrelevant to the actions you should take to discover anything about how the world works. The problem of induction was solved by Karl Popper, who recognised … that induction is impossible and is unnecessary for making progress. You create knowledge by noticing problems with your current theories, guessing solutions to the problem and criticising the guesses …
answered Dec 7 '16 by alanf
1
vote
Your approach, like that of most other philosophers of science, does not make any contact with reality or history or the sorts of problems scientists actually have to deal with on a regular basis. Nor …
answered Jan 8 '18 by alanf

15 30 50 per page