Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Chapter 2
Deduction
Deductive reasoning a type of
reasoning in which the existence of an
appropriate relation between premises and
conclusion, namely that if the premises
are true, the conclusion must be true too:
Premise 1: All NCU teachers are
Christians
Premise 2: Jonathan is a NCU teacher
Conclusion: Therefore, Jonathan is a
Christian
Whether that premises are actually true is
a different matter, which doesnt affect the
Induction
Inductive reasoning we move from premises
about objects we have examined to conclusions
about objects we havent examined.
The first five eggs in the box were rotten
All the eggs have the same best-before date
stamped on them
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Therefore, the sixth egg will be rotten
It is quite conceivable that the sixth egg (which
we havent examined) will be perfectly good.
In other words, it is logically possible for the
Karl Popper
Poppers basic argument was that it is not
possible to prove that a scientific theory is true
from a limited data sample, it is possible to prove
that a theory is false.
There is at least one metal that does not conduct
electricity this counterexample may be used to
disprove a theory that states that all metals
conduct electricity.
The major problem with Poppers argument is
that a scientist is also interested in proving
his/her own theory to be true setting up the use
of inductive inference.
Humes Problem
Hume argued that the use of induction cannot be
rationally justified at all. Hume argued that we
use induction all the time in everyday life and in
science, but he insists this was just a matter of
brute animal habit. If challenged to provide a
good reason for using induction, we can give no
satisfactory answer.
Uniformity of nature (UN) The assumption
that objects we havent examined will be similar,
in the relevant respects, to objects of the same
sort that we have examined:
The fact that the sun has risen every day up
until now may not prove that it will rise
tomorrow, but surely it gives us very good reason
to think it will.
What has happened in the past will happen in
Humes Problem
Hume points out that our inductive inferences
rest on the UN assumption.
Hume concludes that our confidence in
induction is just blind faith it admits of no
rational justification whatever.
Science relies on induction, and Humes
argument seems to show that induction cannot
be justified. If Hume is right, the foundations on
which science is built do not look as solid as we
might have hoped (Humes problem).
Some people believe that the key to solving
Humes problem lies in the concept of probability.
It is natural to think that although the premises
of an inductive inference do not guarantee the
truth of the conclusion, they do make it quite
probable.
thinks the key to minimizing health risks for any food is to aim
for variety. "If you ate swordfish or shark or king
mackerel every day, you could experience mercury
toxicity," Santerre says. "But if you eat them once a month
[and trade off with] some other low-mercury fish, it shouldn't
be a problem." However, the "sensitive population," including
pregnant and nursing women, should always avoid swordfish,
shark, tilefish, and king mackerel, Santerre says. On his list of
safe, low-mercury options: shrimp, salmon, pollock, farmraised catfish, tilapia, flatfish (flounder, sole, plaice),
scallops, haddock, farm-raised trout, herring, crawfish,