tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7360316141951760499.post1517179374985862905..comments2023-05-08T01:41:37.294-07:00Comments on Inductive Quest: The Justification for Induction--Or Lack of ItRod.Inductionhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16343170953954558275noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7360316141951760499.post-54139994155175882172012-09-10T16:11:48.892-07:002012-09-10T16:11:48.892-07:00I disagree with Betsy that induction relies on the...I disagree with Betsy that induction relies on the PNC and the validity of the senses because aren't they inductive generalizations themselves? Did we not come to the conclusion, for instance, that the PNC was a requirement by inducing that without it no form of argumentation is possible? It seems she has it inverted unless I'm misunderstanding something. Francescanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7360316141951760499.post-42566058224819096572009-09-12T20:53:48.850-07:002009-09-12T20:53:48.850-07:00Induction is generalizing, inference from some mem...Induction is generalizing, inference from some member of a class to all. It is a method of reasoning. Reasoning is the means for proving everything therefore one cannot prove reason, you just show how it is done. <br /><br />Dr. Peikoff's own work on induction is available at the ARI Bookstore as "Induction in Physics and Philosophy". My own notes on "Induction in Physics and Philosophy" are available to read at <br />http://forum.objectivismonline.net/index.php?showtopic=17480Grameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14929389788222842031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7360316141951760499.post-90484790374254710872009-09-11T03:27:04.784-07:002009-09-11T03:27:04.784-07:00That's an interesting way to approach the issu...That's an interesting way to approach the issue, and I think it's appropriate. It both offers a sense of the nature of the subject we're dealing with, and motivates learning about it by considering the consequences for lacking the knowledge being sought, and the possibilities that await those who reach a definitive theory.<br /><br />I'll put it up as a separate post, since I plan on writing a full essay on it.<br /><br />It should be thought of as my introductory essay on what induction is, and why we should even care about it.Rod.Inductionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16343170953954558275noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7360316141951760499.post-31107591464430145342009-09-08T19:50:01.814-07:002009-09-08T19:50:01.814-07:00In order to validate, support, and defend the basi...In order to validate, support, and defend the basis of human knowledge -- including the process of concept-formation -- it is necessary to PROVE that induction is valid. I believe I can do so based on two axiomatic concepts on which induction depends: (1) The Law of Non-Contradiction and (2) the validity of the senses.<br /><br />Before I can present my proof, however, it is necessary to have a clear understanding, in terms of essentials, of what induction IS. <br /><br />Before Ayn Rand presented her ethics, she asked the fundamental question: What ARE values and why does man need them? In ItOE she solved the Problem of Universals by first explaining what concepts ARE and why man needs them. <br /><br />Similarly, the first question to ask when seeking an understanding of induction is: What IS induction and why does man need it?<br /><br />I will present my answers, but before I do I would like to hear how Roderick Fitts and the readers of this blog would define induction and explain its place in human cognition.BetsySpeicherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13546046502690948238noreply@blogger.com