more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
In all inductive reasoning we make the assumption that there is a measure of uniformity in nature; or, roughly speaking, that the future will, in the appropriate respects, resemble the past.
Gist of Idea
Induction assumes some uniformity in nature, or that in some respects the future is like the past
Source
A.J. Ayer (The Problem of Knowledge [1956], 2.viii)
Book Ref
Ayer,A.J.: 'The Problem of Knowledge' [Penguin 1966], p.7
A Reaction
I would say that nature is 'stable'. Nature changes, so a global assumption of total uniformity is daft. Do we need some global uniformity assumptions, if the induction involved is local? I would say yes. Are all inductions conditional on this?
| 19463 | Induction assumes some uniformity in nature, or that in some respects the future is like the past [Ayer] |
| 21697 | The Struthionic Fallacy is that of burying one's head in the sand [Quine] |
| 12223 | It is a fallacy to explain the obscure with the even more obscure [Hale/Wright] |
| 14603 | 'Reification' occurs if we mistake a concept for a thing [Schaffer,J] |
| 11070 | 'Denying the antecedent' fallacy: φ→ψ, ¬φ, so ¬ψ [Hanna] |
| 11071 | 'Affirming the consequent' fallacy: φ→ψ, ψ, so φ [Hanna] |
| 11088 | We can list at least fourteen informal fallacies [Hanna] |
| 4686 | Fallacies are errors in reasoning, 'formal' if a clear rule is breached, and 'informal' if more general [PG] |