W. C. Salmon, The Problem of Induction\" In this selection, Salmon lays out the
ID: 3454343 • Letter: W
Question
W. C. Salmon, The Problem of Induction" In this selection, Salmon lays out the problem of induction as we received it from H several attempts to deal with the problem, and concludes that they all fail. This article helps us see the enormous difficulty and importance of the problem of induction. ume, surveys The basic question that Hume was trying to answer, according to Salmon, is the folowing we acquire knowledge of the unobserved? Salmon uses the analogy of an urn filled with black balls. Suppose that all of the black balls we have pulled out so far have tasted like licorice. Are we justified in asserting that the rest of the black balls in the urn will also taste like licorice? Hume's answer to this question is a simple no. To acquire knowledge of the unobserved, we have to rely on the so called principle of the uniformity of nature-the idea that the future will resemble the past. But it at there can be no rational justification for this principle. Salmon surveys six different ways of dealing with this problem. The first attempts to give an inductive justification of induction. But, as Hume pointed out, to justify induction inductively is to reason in a circle. The second points out that the sort of induction that actually goes on in science is more complicated than mere induction by enumeration; rather, it involves the hypothetice-deductive method. But Salmon thinks that even this method is just a more complicated form of induction. The third response was given by Karl Popper, who thought that the idea of science was to propose conjectures that could be falsified, and that every time a conjecture wasn't falsified corroborated. Although this seems more promising, the notion of c understood inductively, in which case this is just another circular attempt at a justification. bold , it was orroboration must be e next attempts do not commit the fallacy of circularity, but Salmon thinks they fail nonethele First, one might try to actually establish the principle of the uniformity of nature, as Kant tried to do. But this principle is supposed to be a synthetic a priori truth, and Hume has arguments against the possibility of such truths (and Salmon agrees with Hume here). Moreover, even if we set that objection aside, such a principle wouldn't help because establishing that the future is similar to th past does not establish that the future is exadly like the past. Another approach is to say that all we get from scie Salmon points out that even if this is true, probabilities still don't give us reason to suppo nce is probabilities about the future, so there is no need to justify induction. But se thatExplanation / Answer
1. It is False that for Salmon, science is ultimately justified.
2. It is True. Ampliative inferences have conclusions which are not directly emanating from the premises of the argument. They are thus invalid arguments.
3. It is false. Salmon in fact shows that the hypothetivodeductive method is but another form of inductively reasoning
4. False. Karl Popper emphasised on corroborative approach in science
5. It is true. Salmon argues that Popper’s idea of corroboration is beyond simplistic deduction.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.