more on this theme | more from this thinker
Full Idea
Some philosophers use 'inductive' to just mean not deductive, …but we reserve it for inferences from examined to unexamined instances of a given kind.
Gist of Idea
Induction is inferences from examined to unexamined instances of a given kind
Source
Samir Okasha (Philosophy of Science: Very Short Intro (2nd ed) [2016], 2)
Book Ref
Okasha,Samir: 'Philosophy of Science: very short intro (2nd ed)' [OUP 2016], p.24
A Reaction
The instances must at least be comparable. Must you know the kind before you start? Surely you can examine a sequence of things, trying to decide whether or not they are of one kind? Is checking the uniformity of a kind induction?
| 22172 | Not all sciences are experimental; astronomy relies on careful observation [Okasha] |
| 22174 | The discoverers of Neptune didn't change their theory because of an anomaly [Okasha] |
| 22175 | Science mostly aims at confirming theories, rather than falsifying them [Okasha] |
| 22177 | Randomised Control Trials have a treatment and a control group, chosen at random [Okasha] |
| 22176 | Induction is inferences from examined to unexamined instances of a given kind [Okasha] |
| 22178 | If the rules only concern changes of belief, and not the starting point, absurd views can look ratiional [Okasha] |
| 22173 | Galileo refuted the Aristotelian theory that heavier objects fall faster [Okasha] |
| 22180 | Multiple realisability is said to make reduction impossible [Okasha] |
| 22182 | Theories with unobservables are underdetermined by the evidence [Okasha] |
| 22185 | Two things can't be incompatible if they are incommensurable [Okasha] |