more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 4811

[filed under theme 14. Science / C. Induction / 4. Reason in Induction ]

Full Idea

Unlike deductive arguments, induction is non-monotonic - that is, it can be invalidated by the addition of new premises.

Gist of Idea

Induction (unlike deduction) is non-monotonic - it can be invalidated by new premises

Source

Stathis Psillos (Causation and Explanation [2002], §9.2.1)

Book Ref

Psillos,Stathis: 'Causation and Explanation' [Acumen 2002], p.248


A Reaction

This is a fancy way of stating the obvious, which is that induction is not a type of deduction. Hume is sometimes accused of this false assumption. Presumably induction is rational, even if it is not actually logical.

Related Ideas

Idea 4810 Valid deduction is monotonic - that is, it remains valid if further premises are added [Psillos]

Idea 13525 Most deductive logic (unlike ordinary reasoning) is 'monotonic' - we don't retract after new givens [Wolf,RS]


The 12 ideas with the same theme [role of pure reason in inductive inference]:

Induction moves from some truths to similar ones, by contraries or consequents [Diog. Laertius]
Premises can support an argument without entailing it [Pollock/Cruz on Hume]
Hume just shows induction isn't deduction [Williams,M on Hume]
Good induction needs 'total evidence' - the absence at the time of any undermining evidence [Salmon]
Science cannot be shown to be rational if induction is rejected [Newton-Smith on Popper]
All reasoning is inductive, and deduction only concerns implication [Harman]
Observed regularities are only predictable if we assume hidden necessity [Nagel]
An inductive inference is underdetermined, by definition [Lipton]
We can argue to support our beliefs, so induction will support induction, for believers in induction [Lipton]
Induction (unlike deduction) is non-monotonic - it can be invalidated by new premises [Psillos]
How can an argument be good induction, but poor deduction? [Baggini /Fosl]
Inductive defences of induction may be rule-circular, but not viciously premise-circular [Ladyman/Ross]