Psychology Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Induction: Induction in logic is a type of reasoning in which we draw general conclusions from specific observations. It is the opposite of deductive reasoning, where we draw specific conclusions from general premises. See also Deduction, Grue, Generalization, Generality, Conclusions._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Gerhard Schurz on Induction - Dictionary of Arguments
I 50 Induction/Schurz: 1. methodological induction: from observations. PopperVsInduction: induction is not the central method of obtaining hypotheses and theories. Confusion between discovery and reasoning. How hypotheses are obtained, perhaps even by guessing, is quite irrelevant to the justification context. Therefore methodological induction is dispensable. >Discoveries, >Justification. 2. logical induction/carnap: not of discovery, but of justification: Method of finding degree of confirmation. >Confirmation, >Degree of confirmation. I 51 PopperVs: one theory may turn out to be closer to the truth than another, but that does not show that there is not a third, even closer to the truth. I.e. there is no absolute claim for theories. Closeness to truth = probability. There is no limited linguistic possibility space which contains all possible alternative theories. But this is only true for logical hypotheses! Empirical hypotheses: here it is possible to make a finite list of all possible alternative hypotheses. Popper: Competing theories can only be evaluated comparatively. >Comparisons, >Comparability. I 52 3 Epistemic induction/Musgrave/Schurz: If a theory has been more successful so far, it is likely that it will be more successful in the future. Here we are not dealing with object hypotheses but with an epistemic meta-hypothesis about degrees of probation. Epistemic induction is indispensable. Without it, Popper's method of proving would be meaningless. Previous success would be irrelevant for future action. >Success, >Epistemology._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
Schu I G. Schurz Einführung in die Wissenschaftstheorie Darmstadt 2006 |
||
