Chapter 2

Scientific Reasoning

Deduction and Induction

Humes Problem
Inference to the Best Explanation (IBE)
Probably and Induction

 Deduction and Induction

Logician make an important distinction

between deductive and inductive patterns of
st
reasoning.1 statement the premises
of
2nd statement inference (P)
3rd statement
the
conclusion (C)

Deductive inference/reasoning has the

following property: P and C have good relation.
Inductive inference/reasoning : P and C have
no relation.
Deductive is a much safer activity than
inductive.
Scientists used inductive reasoning whenever
they move from limited data to a more
general conclusion.

Humes
Problem

 Humes Problem
David Hume (18th century Scottish philosopher,
1711-1776) argued that the use of induction
cant be rationally justified at all. We use
induction all the time, in everyday life and in
science, but he insisted this was just a matter of
brute animal habit.
Whenever we make inductive inferences, we
seem to presuppose what he called Uniformity
of Nature (UN).
UN is not always true. A non-uniform universe
is conceivable, it follows that we cant strictly
prove the truth of UN.
If we could prove that UN is true, then the non-

 Humes Problem
Hume concludes that our confidence in
induction is just blind faith it admits of no
rational justification whatever.
If Hume is right about his opinion, the
foundations on which science is built do not
look quite as solid as we might have hoped.
This puzzling state of affairs is known as
Humes problem of induction.
Peter Strawson respond to Humes problem:
Induction is one of the standards we use to
decide whether claims about the world are
justified.
Frank Ramsey, a Cambridge philosopher from

Inference to
the Best
Explanation
(IBE)

 Inference to the Best Explanation (IBE)

Some philosopher describe IBE as a type of

inductive inference to mean any inference
which is not a deductive.
inductive inference is reserved for
inferences from examined to unexamined
instances of a given kind. So, IBE &
inductive inference are them two different
type of non-deductive inference.
Scientist frequently use IBE, e.g. Charles
Darwin in the theory of evolution, and
Einsteins famous work on Brownian motion.

 Inference to the Best Explanation (IBE)

Whether IBE or ordinary induction is a more

fundamental pattern of inference?
Gilbert Harman has argued that IBE is more
fundamental, ordinary induction is
ultimately dependent on IBE.
Other said that IBE itself parasitic on
ordinary induction.
If we want to use IBE, we need someway of
deciding which of the competing hypothesis
provides the best explanations of the data
the simplest or the most parsimonious one.

Probably
and
Induction

 Probably and Induction

The concept of probability is philosophically

puzzling.
The word probability seems to have more
than one meaning.
The frequently interpretation of probability:
it equates probabilities with proportions or
frequencies.
A statements probability is the measure of
the strength of evidence in its favor.
Most statistician would in fact favour the
frequency interpretation but the problem of
how to interpret probability, like most
philosophical problems, cant be resolved

 Probably and Induction

Philosophers of science are interested in

probability for 2 main reasons:
1st is that in many branches of science
(especially physics and biology) we found
laws and theory that are formulated
using the notion of probability, e.g.: the
theory known as Mendelian genetics.
2nd is the hope that it might shed some
light on inductive inference.

 Probably and Induction

There are 2 types of interpretation of probability:
subjective and logical.
The subjective interpretation of probability implies that
there are no objective facts about probability,
independently of what people believe.
e.g.: Brazil will win the World cup.
The logical interpretation of probability holds that a
statement is objectively true or false, relative to a
specified body of evidence.
e.g.: 1 to 10 of all Englishwomen live to the age of 100
The logical interpretation of probability hold more
promise of a satisfactory response to Hume, than the
subjective.
Unfortunately, most people today believe that the
logical interpretation of probability faces very serious,
probably insuperable, difficulties.