On Sunday, January 16, 2000 9:57 AM Enigl@aol.com wrote:
> That is how Popper solved Hume's "problem of induction." The main reason
> (non-authoritrarian reason) is that _Deduction_ is used in place of
> _Induction_. That is "Why." No one else has been able to do that as far
> I know. The anthology editied Radnitzky and Bartley is the best place I
> to read about this. This anthology has an many con- as pro- articles and
> seems well balanced.
That is a very one sided -- though still I recommend it -- anthology on this
issue. A whole bunch of guys who take Hume's view on induction and then
"solve" the problem -- which is based on Hume's assumptions, not a real
problem with induction.
See, e.g., H. W. B. Joseph's explanation of induction in his _Introduction
to Logic_ for a better solution to the problem.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:02:19 MDT