Philosophy of Science: Hume's Problem of Induction, Two Solutions

This video discusses the Humian Problem of Induction and two proposed solutions including a pragmatic and Duhem-Quinian approach. Also metaphysics.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• David Hume
• problem of induction
• philosophy of science
• epistemology
• theory of knowledge
• metaphysics
• laws of nature
• Duhem-Quine Thesis

[ksee019]

why couldn't they just have a person read this instead of a computer?

[Oppositum]

@ksee019 I know the voice sucks. I stopped making vids like this.

[Nervousification]

Here's my take on the widdle bitty "problem" of induction.

Show how change in time = change in truth.

A lot of people cite the example of a scientist wanting to know the color of apples.

He find a good sample of red apples, which eventually turn brown.

The reason they turn red isn't because of time, it's because of oxidation.

QED mothafucka

[Oppositum]

@Nervousification I think you have misunderstood the problem of induction. In its most basic form, the problem is this: there is no strictly logical or deductive reason whatsoever to think past experience will yield future experience. In academia, this is still an unsolved mystery--although there are newer version of it as well (see "The New Riddle of Induction" essay). Moreover, in your solution you assume an A-Theory of time. If a B-Theory of time is true, time is an illusion of perception.

[Nervousification]

@Oppositum Yeah I had a feeling I fucked up in there, it was too easy.

I don't think my explanation required a theory of time, in fact that's what I was saying it wasn't.

Show why we would expect past experience to not hold up in the future.

[Oppositum]

@Nervousification unless we understand why things remain constant its merely an inductive assumption on our part

[dysonlaz]

This is one of the funniest things I have ever seen.

[rummyisme]

@Nervousification well i mean that when dealing with relation ships and friends or commen situations and usily right about 85 to 90 % the time

[Nervousification]

@rummyisme You can, but how often are you right?

[rummyisme]

@Nervousification i agree with that . induction i think is in everyday life as well from what we now in the action of people you can use induction to even predict what a person is going to say

[Nervousification]

@rummyisme This is how I understand the problem of induction, exactly how many times do you have to test something to be sure the results are meaningful? Of course, this isn't a fallacy all science is based on, for instance physics is based on mathematical laws, while psychology and sociology is based on statistical experiments. If you get the same results after testing 5 people, would that reflect accurately on the world? 100 people? If you know there is an unpredictable variable, then no.

[rummyisme]

@Nervousification what about a variable that cant be predicted and alters that pattern or prediction does that mean induction failed ?

[Wakingheart]

@Oppositum It is famously said that God does not play dice with the universe. Man being limited however has little choice but to gamble with induction.