top-rated free essay

Hume on Induction

By Jblyons1 May 06, 2013 992 Words
Hume’s Problem Of Induction

In A Treatise of Human Nature, Hume challenges the traditional theories of causality, the idea that one can make an observation about two events and infer a new claim concerning the conjunction of the first event and the “resulting” second event. Instead of accepting this notion of causality, Hume questions the certainty of matters of fact and more specifically induction. Hume states there are two distinct types of knowledge: relations of ideas and matters of fact. Relations of ideas are products of deductive, truth-preserving inferences. For instance, the statement 2+2=4 will always be true and cannot be negated without contradiction. Hume denotes relations of ideas as ‘a priori’ , ideas that can be known without experience. On the other hand, matters of fact are products of inductive reasoning that can be negated with contradiction because they may only be known through experience. Hume reckons that experience doesn’t prove very much because the future cannot be proven by the past. Even though we have seen something over and over again, doesn’t mean that it will happen tomorrow or the next day after that. For instance, one could conclude the sun will rise tomorrow morning based on the observation that it has risen every morning of our existence. Yet, this relationship between the morning and the sun rising “leaves not the lowest degree of evidence in any proposition” (Hume 267) that goes beyond our present observations and memory. In essence, cause and effect is no more than ones meaningless habit of association. We have no rational basis for believing that the sun will rise, yet we choose to believe it.

In response to his problem of induction, Hume poses a skeptical solution indulging upon habits and beliefs. He recognizes that there is no exact solution to address the problem of induction because as human beings, when we observe the constant conjunction of two events occurring repetitively, we habitually grow accustom to associating them with each other. In our minds we create a necessary connection, so the next time we see the event happen, we automatically assume the resulting event. The idea that every morning the sun will rise demonstrates humanity’s habit of association. Even though we have seen the sun rise in the past, doesn’t guarantee that it will reoccur, but the experience of seeing it rise so many times produces this expectation within that it will rise again tomorrow. Hume notes that these types of customary conjunctions surround humanity everyday: flame and heat, snow and cold, ravens and black. Experience leads us to believe such causal relationships exist because we don’t know any differently. Nobody has ever held a white raven or touched a cold fire, but what says the possibility for such a thing to occur in the future is impossible? Hume’s argument suggests that we consider how we make factual inferences, since we cannot justify what is sought to be the impossible from happening. Hume recognizes the idea to form these causal relationships is not optional; humanity has no choice but to accept the Uniformity of Nature, “the assumption that the same natural laws and processes that operate in the universe now, have always operated in the universe in the past and apply everywhere in the universe” (Uniformitarianism 1). Nobody can disapprove nor prove such matters of fact. We believe them because we choose to. Hume is just pointing out that it’s circular to say that the future will resemble the past, unless you have observed the future yourself. Without the assumption that past experience will be a replica of future experience, inductive reasoning is unjustified.

The structure of Hume’s argument claims that the problem of induction poses a serious threat for traditional theories of causation. Hume’s justification of his concerns about inductive reasoning validate the fact that we cannot base the future off of the past. Unless somebody has experienced the future for themselves, we cannot make claims with one-hundred percent certainty that something will happen. The expectation that the sun will rise tomorrow is unjustified, circular and weak. Just because the scientific method has been successful in the past, doesn’t mean it will continue to be successful in the future. All empirical science and everyday reasoning does in fact depend upon induction. If Hume states that induction is irrational, this means that the sciences and everyday reasoning are just as irrational. However, even if induction may not be that good, it is the best approach to acquiring such knowledge. Induction allows us to gain knowledge of the universe that would not merely be possible if we based our knowledge solely upon means of deduction. In doing so, this would lead to the problem of deduction and it’s this conclusion that proves the accuracy of Hume’s argument.

Even after recognizing the threats posed by induction, Hume’s solution fails to answer the problem, due to the fact that induction is unsolvable. Instead, Hume confirms that there is nothing that can physically stop a human-being from inductively thinking. If you constantly see something over and over again, it is merely impossible not to associate the two events in conjunction with one another. The reason being is humans have a natural instinct to associate ideas. We habitually say event A caused event B, if we repetitively observe such a connection. According to Hume, nothing can possibly justify induction. There is no definitive way of creating a logical solution. The success of science is a valid attempt to disprove the problem of induction, but this response ends up being a circular argument because success in the past doesn’t guarantee success in the future. In short, we can use induction with certainty when we can prove it is reliable, but for now we can only ponder upon the possibilities of uncertainties that the problem of induction poses.

Works Cited

Hume , David. A Treatise of Human Nature. 1739. Print.

"Uniformitarianism." n.pag. Memidex. Web. 12 Apr 2013.

Cite This Document

Related Documents

  • David Hume on Induction and Problems of Induction.

    ...Hume’s Induction, Problem of Induction, and the inductive Reasoning based upon Empirical science: We all believe that we have knowledge of facts extending far beyond those we directly perceive. Though our views of events are dependent and limited to both space and time, and our experiences are limited, we still construct the hypothetical pred...

    Read More
  • David Hume

    ...consequences of David Hume's view on induction and self for managers? What are the consequences of David Hume's view on induction and self for managers? David Hume was born in Scotland in 1711. He is known as a philosopher, historian, economist, and essayist, especially for advocating empiricism and skepticism. He had strongly influenced i...

    Read More
  • The Problem Of Induction

    ...Term Paper Final Draft: The Problem of Induction The philosopher Hume is known for his problem of induction and how it is not reliable at times when reasoning an argument. Hume had many strengths and also a few weaknesses in his argument. The philosopher also made several valid and intriguing points that would call for an interesting discuss...

    Read More
  • Induction - Philosophy Though, however many times this may happens cannot prove your safety. At any given moment on the route, a semi truck could change lanes too soon, totaling your car. You could hydroplane in the rain. You could fall asleep at the wheel. The possibilities of what could change a constant schedule are endless. By this being so, our past ob...

    Read More
  • Hume, Locke, Berke

    ...that will be introduced in this paper are David Hume, John Locke, and George Berkeley. Each have either found a new theory or expanded it from a previous one. Although it is important to know what their theories talk, it is as important to also study how they were led to believe in those theories. David Hume was a Scottish philosopher, histor...

    Read More
  • David Hume

    ...proves he exists by the virtue of thinking therefore he has the concept idea of “self”. David Hume has different approach compared to Descartes who begins by proving his mind exists. David Hume doesn’t doubt existence of mind but he is interested in how does the mind really works. He starts from question where do ideas come from. He be...

    Read More
  • Hume Skepticism

    ...Hume asked, "what reason do we have in thinking the future will resemble the past?" It is reasonable to think that it will because there is no contradiction in supposing the future won't resemble the past. But it is also true that is possible for the world to change dramatically and our previous experience would be completely useless in judgi...

    Read More
  • The problem of induction

    ...THE PROBLEM OF INDUCTION There are two assumptions that are made by induction; firstly that there is no unusual circumstance present and secondly the activity will result in the same experience, experienced in the past. However David Hume says there is a problem with induction as the future does not always have to follow the past. This is becau...

    Read More

Discover the Best Free Essays on StudyMode

Conquer writer's block once and for all.

High Quality Essays

Our library contains thousands of carefully selected free research papers and essays.

Popular Topics

No matter the topic you're researching, chances are we have it covered.