Results for 'Inductive inference'

976 found
Order:
  1. Evidence and Inductive Inference.Nevin Climenhaga - 2024 - In Maria Lasonen-Aarnio & Clayton Littlejohn (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of the Philosophy of Evidence. New York, NY: Routledge. pp. 435-449.
    This chapter presents a typology of the different kinds of inductive inferences we can draw from our evidence, based on the explanatory relationship between evidence and conclusion. Drawing on the literature on graphical models of explanation, I divide inductive inferences into (a) downwards inferences, which proceed from cause to effect, (b) upwards inferences, which proceed from effect to cause, and (c) sideways inferences, which proceed first from effect to cause and then from that cause to an additional effect. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  2. Genericity and Inductive Inference.Henry Ian Schiller - 2023 - Philosophy of Science:1-18.
    We are often justified in acting on the basis of evidential confirmation. I argue that such evidence supports belief in non-quantificational generic generalizations, rather than universally quantified generalizations. I show how this account supports, rather than undermines, a Bayesian account of confirmation. Induction from confirming instances of a generalization to belief in the corresponding generic is part of a reasoning instinct that is typically (but not always) correct, and allows us to approximate the predictions that formal epistemology would make.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  3. Ramsification and inductive inference.Panu Raatikainen - 2012 - Synthese 187 (2):569-577.
    An argument, different from the Newman objection, against the view that the cognitive content of a theory is exhausted by its Ramsey sentence is reviewed. The crux of the argument is that Ramsification may ruin inductive systematization between theory and observation. The argument also has some implications concerning the issue of underdetermination.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  4. How to Learn the Natural Numbers: Inductive Inference and the Acquisition of Number Concepts.Eric Margolis & Stephen Laurence - 2008 - Cognition 106 (2):924-939.
    Theories of number concepts often suppose that the natural numbers are acquired as children learn to count and as they draw an induction based on their interpretation of the first few count words. In a bold critique of this general approach, Rips, Asmuth, Bloomfield [Rips, L., Asmuth, J. & Bloomfield, A.. Giving the boot to the bootstrap: How not to learn the natural numbers. Cognition, 101, B51–B60.] argue that such an inductive inference is consistent with a representational system (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  5. Demonstrative Induction and the Skeleton of Inference.P. D. Magnus - 2008 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 22 (3):303-315.
    It has been common wisdom for centuries that scientific inference cannot be deductive; if it is inference at all, it must be a distinctive kind of inductive inference. According to demonstrative theories of induction, however, important scientific inferences are not inductive in the sense of requiring ampliative inference rules at all. Rather, they are deductive inferences with sufficiently strong premises. General considerations about inferences suffice to show that there is no difference in justification between (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  6.  52
    Unified Inductive Logic: From Formal Learning to Statistical Inference to Supervised Learning.Hanti Lin - manuscript
    While the traditional conception of inductive logic is Carnapian, I develop a Peircean alternative and use it to unify formal learning theory, statistics, and a significant part of machine learning: supervised learning. Some crucial standards for evaluating non-deductive inferences have been assumed separately in those areas, but can actually be justified by a unifying principle.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7. Induction and inference to the best explanation.Ruth Weintraub - 2013 - Philosophical Studies 166 (1):203-216.
    In this paper I adduce a new argument in support of the claim that IBE is an autonomous form of inference, based on a familiar, yet surprisingly, under-discussed, problem for Hume’s theory of induction. I then use some insights thereby gleaned to argue for the claim that induction is really IBE, and draw some normative conclusions.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  8. The Problem of Induction and the Problem of Free Will.Avijit Lahiri - manuscript
    This essay presents a point of view for looking at `free will', with the purpose of interpreting where exactly the freedom lies. For, freedom is what we mean by it. It compares the exercise of free will with the making of inferences, which usually is predominantly inductive in nature. The making of inference and the exercise of free will, both draw upon psychological resources that define our ‘selves’. I examine the constitution of the self of an individual, especially (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  9. Inference Belief and Interpretation in Science.Avijit Lahiri - manuscript
    This monograph is an in-depth and engaging discourse on the deeply cognitive roots of human scientific quest. The process of making scientific inferences is continuous with the day-to-day inferential activity of individuals, and is predominantly inductive in nature. Inductive inference, which is fallible, exploratory, and open-ended, is of essential relevance in our incessant efforts at making sense of a complex and uncertain world around us, and covers a vast range of cognitive activities, among which scientific exploration constitutes (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10. L’inférence à la meilleure explication, l’induction et les agents épistémiques.Victor Tremblay-Baillargeon - 2023 - Revue Phares 23 (1):129-145.
    Cet article cherche à approfondir la conclusion de Hume selon laquelle l’induction, malgré son importance comme méthode inférentielle, est injustifiable. J’argumente en particulier que l’induction devrait être comprise comme un processus psychologique fondamental. Mon plan est le suivant : après un résumé du problème de l’induction humien, j’offre une rapide argumentation en faveur de la conceptualisation de l’induction comme une inférence à la meilleure explication (IME). Ensuite, je propose un argument original visant à montrer que l’IME est un processus psychologique (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11. What is the Statistical Inference? : An Invitation to Carnap's inductive Logic.Yusuke Kaneko - 2022 - The Basis : The Annual Bulletin of Research Center for Liberal Education 12:91-117.
    Although written in Japanese, what the statistical inference is philosophically investigated.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  12. Induction and the Glue of the World.Harjit Bhogal - 2021 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 99 (2):319-333.
    Views which deny that there are necessary connections between distinct existences have often been criticized for leading to inductive skepticism. If there is no glue holding the world together then there seems to be no basis on which to infer from past to future. However, deniers of necessary connections have typically been unconcerned. After all, they say, everyone has a problem with induction. But, if we look at the connection between induction and explanation, we can develop the problem of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  13. Speed-Optimal Induction and Dynamic Coherence.Michael Nielsen & Eric Wofsey - 2022 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 73 (2):439-455.
    A standard way to challenge convergence-based accounts of inductive success is to claim that they are too weak to constrain inductive inferences in the short run. We respond to such a challenge by answering some questions raised by Juhl (1994). When it comes to predicting limiting relative frequencies in the framework of Reichenbach, we show that speed-optimal convergence—a long-run success condition—induces dynamic coherence in the short run.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  14. Human Induction in Machine Learning: A Survey of the Nexus.Petr Spelda & Vit Stritecky - 2021 - ACM Computing Surveys 54 (3):1-18.
    As our epistemic ambitions grow, the common and scientific endeavours are becoming increasingly dependent on Machine Learning (ML). The field rests on a single experimental paradigm, which consists of splitting the available data into a training and testing set and using the latter to measure how well the trained ML model generalises to unseen samples. If the model reaches acceptable accuracy, an a posteriori contract comes into effect between humans and the model, supposedly allowing its deployment to target environments. Yet (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  15.  51
    Modes of Convergence to the Truth: Steps Toward a Better Epistemology of Induction.Hanti Lin - 2022 - Review of Symbolic Logic 15 (2):277-310.
    Evaluative studies of inductive inferences have been pursued extensively with mathematical rigor in many disciplines, such as statistics, econometrics, computer science, and formal epistemology. Attempts have been made in those disciplines to justify many different kinds of inductive inferences, to varying extents. But somehow those disciplines have said almost nothing to justify a most familiar kind of induction, an example of which is this: “We’ve seen this many ravens and they all are black, so all ravens are black.” (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  16. Induction and Natural Kinds Revisited.Howard Sankey - 2021 - In Stathis Psillos, Benjamin Hill & Henrik Lagerlund (eds.), Causal Powers in Science: Blending Historical and Conceptual Perspectives. Oxford University Press. pp. 284-299.
    In ‘Induction and Natural Kinds’, I proposed a solution to the problem of induction according to which our use of inductive inference is reliable because it is grounded in the natural kind structure of the world. When we infer that unobserved members of a kind will have the same properties as observed members of the kind, we are right because all members of the kind possess the same essential properties. The claim that the existence of natural kinds is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  17. Inductive Reasoning Involving Social Kinds.Barrett Emerick & Tyler Hildebrand - 2024 - Journal of the American Philosophical Association 10 (4):675 - 694.
    Most social policies cannot be defended without making inductive inferences. For example, consider certain arguments for racial profiling and affirmative action, respectively. They begin with statistics about crime or socioeconomic indicators. Next, there is an inductive step in which the statistic is projected from the past to the future. Finally, there is a normative step in which a policy is proposed as a response in the service of some goal—for example, to reduce crime or to correct socioeconomic imbalances. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18. Seeing inferences through a metaphysical lens.Matheus Silva - manuscript
    In this paper, I argue that inductive inferences can be reinterpreted as deductive through a metaphysical lens of modal necessity. Instead of viewing deduction as a limit case of induction where the conclusion is certain rather than probable, we can rethinking inductive inferences as a particular type of deductive inferences where the conclusion is necessitated by premises in specific modal ranges.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19. Inference to the Best Explanation, Naturalism, and Theism.Seungbae Park - 2023 - Implicit Religion 24 (3-4):472-485.
    De Ray argues that relying on inference to the best explanation (IBE) requires the metaphysical belief that most phenomena have explanations. I object that instead the metaphysical belief requires the use of IBE. De Ray uses IBE himself to establish theism that God is the cause of the metaphysical belief, and thus he has the burden of establishing the metaphysical belief independently of using IBE. Naturalism that the world is the cause of the metaphysical belief is preferable to theism, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  20. Understanding Creativity: Affect Decision and Inference.Avijit Lahiri - manuscript
    In this essay we collect and put together a number of ideas relevant to the under- standing of the phenomenon of creativity, confining our considerations mostly to the domain of cognitive psychology while we will, on a few occasions, hint at neuropsy- chological underpinnings as well. In this, we will mostly focus on creativity in science, since creativity in other domains of human endeavor have common links with scientific creativity while differing in numerous other specific respects. We begin by briefly (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  21. Proving Induction.Alexander Paseau - 2011 - Australasian Journal of Logic 10:1-17.
    The hard problem of induction is to argue without begging the question that inductive inference, applied properly in the proper circumstances, is conducive to truth. A recent theorem seems to show that the hard problem has a deductive solution. The theorem, provable in ZFC, states that a predictive function M exists with the following property: whatever world we live in, M ncorrectly predicts the world’s present state given its previous states at all times apart from a well-ordered subset. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  22. Induction, Philosophical Conceptions of.John P. McCaskey - 2020 - Encyclopedia of Renaissance Philosophy.
    How induction was understood took a substantial turn during the Renaissance. At the beginning, induction was understood as it had been throughout the medieval period, as a kind of propositional inference that is stronger the more it approximates deduction. During the Renaissance, an older understanding, one prevalent in antiquity, was rediscovered and adopted. By this understanding, induction identifies defining characteristics using a process of comparing and contrasting. Important participants in the change were Jean Buridan, humanists such as Lorenzo Valla (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  23. Induction, Experimentation and Causation in the Social Sciences.Lars-Göran Johansson - 2021 - Philosophies 6 (4):105.
    Inductive thinking is a universal human habit; we generalise from our experiences the best we can. The induction problem is to identify which observed regularities provide reasonable justification for inductive conclusions. In the natural sciences, we can often use strict laws in making successful inferences about unobserved states of affairs. In the social sciences, by contrast, we have no strict laws, only regularities which most often are conditioned on ceteris paribus clauses. This makes it much more difficult to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  24. Induction without fallibility, deduction without certainty.Matheus Silva - manuscript
    There is no strict alignment between induction and fallibility, nor between deduction and certainty. Fallibility in deductive inferences, such as failed mathematical theorems, demonstrates that deduction does not guarantee certainty. Similarly, inductive reasoning, typically seen as weaker and more prone to uncertainty, is not inherently tied to fallibility. In fact, inductive generalizations can sometimes lead to certainty, especially in mathematical contexts. By decoupling induction from fallibility and deduction from certainty, we preserve the distinct nature of each form of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  25. Induction and Supposition.Brian Weatherson - 2012 - The Reasoner 6:78-80.
    Applying good inductive rules inside the scope of suppositions leads to implausible results. I argue it is a mistake to think that inductive rules of inference behave anything like 'inference rules' in natural deduction systems. And this implies that it isn't always true that good arguments can be run 'off-line' to gain a priori knowledge of conditional conclusions.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  26. Probability and Inductive Logic.Antony Eagle - manuscript
    Reasoning from inconclusive evidence, or ‘induction’, is central to science and any applications we make of it. For that reason alone it demands the attention of philosophers of science. This Element explores the prospects of using probability theory to provide an inductive logic, a framework for representing evidential support. Constraints on the ideal evaluation of hypotheses suggest that overall support for a hypothesis is represented by its probability in light of the total evidence, and incremental support, or confirmation, indicated (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  27. Inductive Risk, Understanding, and Opaque Machine Learning Models.Emily Sullivan - 2022 - Philosophy of Science 89 (5):1065-1074.
    Under what conditions does machine learning (ML) model opacity inhibit the possibility of explaining and understanding phenomena? In this article, I argue that nonepistemic values give shape to the ML opacity problem even if we keep researcher interests fixed. Treating ML models as an instance of doing model-based science to explain and understand phenomena reveals that there is (i) an external opacity problem, where the presence of inductive risk imposes higher standards on externally validating models, and (ii) an internal (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  28.  44
    Mechanizing Induction.Ronald Ortner & Hannes Leitgeb - 2009 - In Dov Gabbay (ed.), The Handbook of the History of Logic. Elsevier. pp. 719--772.
    In this chapter we will deal with “mechanizing” induction, i.e. with ways in which theoretical computer science approaches inductive generalization. In the field of Machine Learning, algorithms for induction are developed. Depending on the form of the available data, the nature of these algorithms may be very different. Some of them combine geometric and statistical ideas, while others use classical reasoning based on logical formalism. However, we are not so much interested in the algorithms themselves, but more on the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  29. Reichenbach, Russell and the Metaphysics of Induction.Michael J. Shaffer - 2019 - Argumenta 8:161-181.
    Hans Reichenbach’s pragmatic treatment of the problem of induction in his later works on inductive inference was, and still is, of great interest. However, it has been dismissed as a pseudo-solution and it has been regarded as problematically obscure. This is, in large part, due to the difficulty in understanding exactly what Reichenbach’s solution is supposed to amount to, especially as it appears to offer no response to the inductive skeptic. For entirely different reasons, the significance of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  30. A statistical learning approach to a problem of induction.Kino Zhao - manuscript
    At its strongest, Hume's problem of induction denies the existence of any well justified assumptionless inductive inference rule. At the weakest, it challenges our ability to articulate and apply good inductive inference rules. This paper examines an analysis that is closer to the latter camp. It reviews one answer to this problem drawn from the VC theorem in statistical learning theory and argues for its inadequacy. In particular, I show that it cannot be computed, in general, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  31. Abductive inference and delusional belief.Max Coltheart, Peter Menzies & John Sutton - 2010 - Cognitive Neuropsychiatry 15 (1):261-287.
    Delusional beliefs have sometimes been considered as rational inferences from abnormal experiences. We explore this idea in more detail, making the following points. Firstly, the abnormalities of cognition which initially prompt the entertaining of a delusional belief are not always conscious and since we prefer to restrict the term “experience” to consciousness we refer to “abnormal data” rather than “abnormal experience”. Secondly, we argue that in relation to many delusions (we consider eight) one can clearly identify what the abnormal cognitive (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   68 citations  
  32. Inter-world probability and the problem of induction.Chase B. Wrenn - 2006 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 87 (3):387–402.
    Laurence BonJour has recently proposed a novel and interesting approach to the problem of induction. He grants that it is contingent, and so not a priori, that our patterns of inductive inference are reliable. Nevertheless, he claims, it is necessary and a priori that those patterns are highly likely to be reliable, and that is enough to ground an a priori justification induction. This paper examines an important defect in BonJour's proposal. Once we make sense of the claim (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  33. The Pessimistic Induction and the Golden Rule.Seungbae Park - 2018 - Problemos 93:70-80.
    Nickles (2017) advocates scientific antirealism by appealing to the pessimistic induction over scientific theories, the illusion hypothesis (Quoidbach, Gilbert, and Wilson, 2013), and Darwin’s evolutionary theory. He rejects Putnam’s (1975: 73) no-miracles argument on the grounds that it uses inference to the best explanation. I object that both the illusion hypothesis and evolutionary theory clash with the pessimistic induction and with his negative attitude towards inference to the best explanation. I also argue that Nickles’s positive philosophical theories are (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  34. The Problem of Piecemeal Induction.Conor Mayo-Wilson - 2011 - Philosophy of Science 78 (5):864-874.
    It is common to assume that the problem of induction arises only because of small sample sizes or unreliable data. In this paper, I argue that the piecemeal collection of data can also lead to underdetermination of theories by evidence, even if arbitrarily large amounts of completely reliable experimental and observational data are collected. Specifically, I focus on the construction of causal theories from the results of many studies (perhaps hundreds), including randomized controlled trials and observational studies, where the studies (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  35. The Sources of Mill’s View of Ratiocination and Induction.Steffen Ducheyne & John P. McCaskey - 2014 - In Antis Loizides (ed.), Mill’s a System of Logic: Critical Appraisals. New York: Routledge.
    The philosophical background important to Mill’s theory of induction has two major components: Richard Whately’s introduction of the uniformity principle into inductive inference and the loss of the idea of formal cause.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  36. What is Deductive Inference?Axel Barcelo - manuscript
    What is an inference and when is an inference deductive rather than inductive, abductive, etc. The goal of this paper is precisely to determine what is that we, humans, do when we engage in deduction, i.e., whether there is something that satisfies both our pre-theoretical intuitions and theoretical presuppositions about deduction, as a cognitive process. The paper is structured in two parts: the first one deals with the issue of what is an inference. There, I will (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  37. Supraclassical Consequence: Abduction, Induction, and Probability for Commonsense Reasoning.Luis M. Augusto - 2023 - Journal of Knowledge Structures and Systems 4 (1):1 - 46.
    Reasoning over our knowledge bases and theories often requires non-deductive inferences, especially – but by no means only – when commonsense reasoning is the case, i.e. when practical agency is called for. This kind of reasoning can be adequately formalized via the notion of supraclassical consequence, a non-deductive consequence tightly associated with default and non-monotonic reasoning and featuring centrally in abductive, inductive, and probabilistic logical systems. In this paper, we analyze core concepts and problems of these systems in the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  38. Explanatory reasoning in the material theory of induction.William Peden - 2022 - Metascience 31 (3):303-309.
    In his recent book, John Norton has created a theory of inference to the best explanation, within the context of his "material theory of induction". I apply it to the problem of scientific explanations that are false: if we want the theories in our explanations to be true, then why do historians and scientists often say that false theories explained phenomena? I also defend Norton's theory against some possible objections.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  39. Hume Is Not A Skeptic about Induction.Xinli Wang - 2001 - Diálogos. Revista de Filosofía de la Universidad de Puerto Rico 36 (78):41-54.
    On the basis of the distinction between logical and factual probability, epistemic justification is distinguished from logical justification of induction. It is argued that, contrary to the accepted interpretation of Hume, Hume believes that inductive inferences are epistemically legitimate and justifiable. Hence the beliefs arrived at via (correct) inductive inferences are rational beliefs. According to this interpretation, Hume is not a radical skeptic about induction.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  40. Induction.Peter Millican - manuscript
    The word ‘induction’ is derived from Cicero’s ‘inductio’, itself a translation of Aristotle’s ‘epagôgê’. In its traditional sense this denotes the inference of general laws from particular instances, but within modern philosophy it has usually been understood in a related but broader sense, covering any non-demonstrative reasoning that is founded on experience. As such it encompasses reasoning from observed to unobserved, both inference of general laws and of further particular instances, but it excludes those cases of reasoning in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  41. Does the Dome Defeat the Material Theory of Induction?William Peden - 2021 - Erkenntnis 88 (5):2171-2190.
    According to John D. Norton's Material Theory of Induction, all inductive inferences are justified by local facts, rather than their formal features or some grand principles of nature's uniformity. Recently, Richard Dawid (Found Phys 45(9):1101–1109, 2015) has offered a challenge to this theory: in an adaptation of Norton's own celebrated "Dome" thought experiment, it seems that there are certain inductions that are intuitively reasonable, but which do not have any local facts that could serve to justify them in accordance (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  42. Qualities, Universals, Kinds, and the New Riddle of induction.F. Thomas Burke - 2002 - In F. Thomas Burke, D. Micah Hester & Robert B. Talisse (eds.), Dewey's logical theory: new studies and interpretations. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press.
    The limited aim here is to explain what John Dewey might say about the formulation of the grue example. Nelson Goodman’s problem of distinguishing good and bad inductive inferences is an important one, but the grue example misconstrues this complex problem for certain technical reasons, due to ambiguities that contemporary logical theory has not yet come to terms with. Goodman’s problem is a problem for the theory of induction and thus for logical theory in general. Behind the whole discussion (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  43. Ontological Solutions to the Problem of Induction.Mohammad Mahdi Hatef - 2022 - Logos and Episteme 13 (1):65-74.
    The idea of the uniformity of nature, as a solution to the problem of induction, has at least two contemporary versions: natural kinds and natural necessity. Then there are at least three alternative ontological ideas addressing the problem of induction. In this paper, I articulate how these ideas are used to justify the practice of inductive inference, and compare them, in terms of their applicability, to see whether each of them is preferred in addressing the problem of induction. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  44. Coherence of Inferences.Matheus Silva - manuscript
    It is usually accepted that deductions are non-informative and monotonic, inductions are informative and nonmonotonic, abductions create hypotheses but are epistemically irrelevant, and both deductions and inductions can’t provide new insights. In this article, I attempt to provide a more cohesive view of the subject with the following hypotheses: (1) the paradigmatic examples of deductions, such as modus ponens and hypothetical syllogism, are not inferential forms, but coherence requirements for inferences; (2) since any reasoner aims to be coherent, any (...) must be deductive; (3) a coherent inference is an intuitive process where the premises should be taken as sufficient evidence for the conclusion, which on its turn should be viewed as necessary evidence for the premises in some modal range; (4) inductions, properly understood, are abductions, but there are no abductions beyond the fact that in any inference the conclusion should be regarded as necessary evidence for the premises; (5) monotonicity is not only compatible with the retraction of past inferences given new information, but it is a requirement for it; (6) this explanation of inferences holds true for discovery processes, predictions and trivial inferences. (shrink)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  45. Observation and Induction.Theodore J. Everett - 2010 - Logos and Episteme 1 (2):303-324.
    This article offers a simple technical resolution to the problem of induction, which is to say that general facts are not always inferred from observations of particular facts, but are themselves sometimes defeasibly observed. The article suggests a holistic account of observation that allows for general statements in empirical theories to be interpreted as observation reports, in place of the common but arguably obsolete idea that observations are exclusively particular. Predictions and other particular statements about unobservable facts can then appear (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  46. Categorical harmony and path induction.Patrick Walsh - 2017 - Review of Symbolic Logic 10 (2):301-321.
    This paper responds to recent work in the philosophy of Homotopy Type Theory by James Ladyman and Stuart Presnell. They consider one of the rules for identity, path induction, and justify it along ‘pre-mathematical’ lines. I give an alternate justification based on the philosophical framework of inferentialism. Accordingly, I construct a notion of harmony that allows the inferentialist to say when a connective or concept is meaning-bearing and this conception unifies most of the prominent conceptions of harmony through category theory. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  47. Intuitions for inferences.Sinan Dogramaci - 2012 - Philosophical Studies 165 (2):371-399.
    In this paper, I explore a question about deductive reasoning: why am I in a position to immediately infer some deductive consequences of what I know, but not others? I show why the question cannot be answered in the most natural ways of answering it, in particular in Descartes’s way of answering it. I then go on to introduce a new approach to answering the question, an approach inspired by Hume’s view of inductive reasoning.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   30 citations  
  48.  95
    Note on deductive inferences.Matheus Silva - manuscript
    In relation to inferences, there is a tendency to conflate metaphysical with epistemic modalities. Concerning deductive inferences, necessity is conflated with certainty, but deductive inferences can be just likely based on the available evidence. Non-deductive inferences are defined by their uncertainty, but their epistemic status is insufficient to distinguish them from deductive inferences.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  49. Modus Tollens probabilized: deductive and Inductive Methods in medical diagnosis.Barbara Osimani - 2009 - MEDIC 17 (1/3):43-59.
    Medical diagnosis has been traditionally recognized as a privileged field of application for so called probabilistic induction. Consequently, the Bayesian theorem, which mathematically formalizes this form of inference, has been seen as the most adequate tool for quantifying the uncertainty surrounding the diagnosis by providing probabilities of different diagnostic hypotheses, given symptomatic or laboratory data. On the other side, it has also been remarked that differential diagnosis rather works by exclusion, e.g. by modus tollens, i.e. deductively. By drawing on (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  50. The Difference-to-Inference Model for Values in Science.Jacob Stegenga & Tarun Menon - 2023 - Res Philosophica 100 (4):423-447.
    The value-free ideal for science holds that values should not influence the core features of scientific reasoning. We defend the difference-to-inference model of value-permeation, which holds that value-permeation in science is problematic when values make a difference to the inferences made about a hypothesis. This view of value-permeation is superior to existing views, and it suggests a corresponding maxim—namely, that scientists should strive to eliminate differences to inference. This maxim is the basis of a novel value-free ideal for (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
1 — 50 / 976