12293 | We say 'so in cases of this kind', but how do you decide what is 'of this kind'? [Aristotle] |
6027 | From the fact that some men die, we cannot infer that they all do [Philodemus] |
1886 | If you don't view every particular, you may miss the one which disproves your universal induction [Sext.Empiricus] |
5053 | The instances confirming a general truth are never enough to establish its necessity [Leibniz] |
2199 | Reason cannot show why reliable past experience should extend to future times and remote places [Hume] |
2201 | Induction can't prove that the future will be like the past, since induction assumes this [Hume] |
2202 | Fools, children and animals all learn from experience [Hume] |
2204 | All inferences from experience are effects of custom, not reasoning [Hume] |
2203 | If we infer causes from repetition, this explains why we infer from a thousand objects what we couldn't infer from one [Hume] |
19235 | How does induction get started? [Peirce] |
19236 | Induction can never prove that laws have no exceptions [Peirce] |
19251 | The worst fallacy in induction is generalising one recondite property from a sample [Peirce] |
22654 | We can't know if the laws of nature are stable, but we must postulate it or assume it [James] |
5390 | Chickens are not very good at induction, and are surprised when their feeder wrings their neck [Russell] |
5392 | It doesn't follow that because the future has always resembled the past, that it always will [Russell] |
5394 | We can't prove induction from experience without begging the question [Russell] |
5191 | We can't use the uniformity of nature to prove induction, as that would be circular [Ayer] |
7779 | There is no such thing as induction [Popper, by Magee] |
17685 | Induction aims at 'all Fs', but abduction aims at hidden or theoretical entities [Armstrong] |
13607 | If events are unconnected, then induction cannot be solved [Ellis] |
6952 | Induction is 'defeasible', since additional information can invalidate it [Harman] |
15255 | Conjunctions explain nothing, and so do not give a reason for confidence in inductions [Harré/Madden] |
15270 | Hume's atomic events makes properties independent, and leads to problems with induction [Harré/Madden] |
16823 | Standard induction does not allow for vertical inferences, to some unobservable lower level [Lipton] |
15713 | The first million numbers confirm that no number is greater than a million [Kaplan/Kaplan] |
15695 | Children make errors in induction by focusing too much on categories [Gelman] |
15694 | Children overestimate the power of a single example [Gelman] |
6791 | If Hume is right about induction, there is no scientific knowledge [Bird] |
6790 | Anything justifying inferences from observed to unobserved must itself do that [Bird] |
19668 | Hume's question is whether experimental science will still be valid tomorrow [Meillassoux] |
7295 | Maybe induction is only reliable IF reality is stable [Mitchell,A] |
14570 | Nature is not completely uniform, and some regular causes sometimes fail to produce their effects [Mumford/Anjum] |