Skip to main content

Abstract

Induction is a mode of inference which has important links with many epistemological problems. It is a common feature of the different varieties of induction that they are not necessarily truth-preserving. Thus, induction is weaker than logical deduction or entailment. However, unlike deduction, inductive inference is ampliative in the sense that at least part of the content of its conclusion is not explicitly or implicitly present in the premises. Hence, if there is a rational answer to Hume’s problem concerning the justification of induction, inductive inferences can be claimed to be knowledge-increasing, i.e., they allow us to expand the domain of our rationally warranted beliefs. As responses to these challenges, philosophers have given probabilistic reconstructions of different types of induction and analysed their role in the methodology of the empirical sciences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 509.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 649.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 649.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Bacon, F.: 1960, The New Organon, The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Indianapolis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bar-Hillel, Y.: 1964, Language and Information, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barker, S.: 1957, Induction and Hypothesis, Cornell University Press, Ithaca.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, M.: 1954, Problems of Analysis, Routledge, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blake, R. M., C. J. Ducasse, and E. H. Madden: 1960, Theories of Scientific Method: The Renaissance Through the Nineteenth Century, The University of Washington Press, Seattle.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogdan, R. J.: 1976, Local Induction, D. Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogdan, R. J. (ed.): 1982, Henry E. Kyburg Isaac Levi, Profiles, D. Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, R.: 1984, `The Current Status of Scientific Realism’, in J. Leplin (ed.), Scientific Realism, University of California Press, Berkeley, pp. 41–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butts, R. E. (ed.): 1968, William Whewell’s Theory of Scientific Method, University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, E. F.: 1968, Probability and Opinion: A Study in the Medieval Presuppositions of Post-Medieval Theories of Probability, Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnap, R.: 1952, The Continuum of Inductive Methods, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnap, R.: 1962, The Logical Foundations of Probability, 2nd ed., The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, L. J.: 1989, An Introduction to the Philosophy of Induction and Probability, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Earman, J.: 1992, Bayes or Bust? A Critical Examination of Bayesian Confirmation Theory, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, A. W. F.: 1972, Likelihood, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Festa, R.: 1993, Optimum Inductive Methods, Kluwer, Dordrecht.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fetzer, J. H.: 1981, Scientific Knowledge: Causation, Explanation, and Corroboration, D. Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fetzer, J. (ed.): 1988, Probability and Causality, D. Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fine, T.: 1973, Theories of Probability, Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finetti, B.: 1972, Probability, Induction, and Statistics: The Art of Guessing, Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R. A.: 1956, Statistical Methods and Scientific Inference, Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forster, M. and E. Sober: 1994, `How to Tell when Simpler, More Unified, or Less ad hoc

    Google Scholar 

  • Theories will Provide More Accurate Predictions’, The British Journal for the Philosophyof Science 45, 1–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foster, M. and M. Martin (eds.): 1966, Probability, Confirmation, and Simplicity, The Odyssey Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gabbay, D. M. and P. Smets (eds.): 1998, Handbook of Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems, vol. I-IV, Kluwer, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gärdenfors, P.: 1988, Knowledge in Flux: Modeling the Dynamics of Epistemic States, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gärdenfors, P. and N.-E. Sahlin (eds.): 1988, Decision, Probability and Utility, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giere, R.: 1979, Understanding Scientific Reasoning, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glymour, C.: 1980, Theory and Evidence, Princeton University Press, Princeton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Good, I. J.: 1983, Good Thinking, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis. Goodman, N.: 1955, Fact, Fiction, and Forecast, Bobbs-Merrill, Indianapolis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacking, I.: 1965, The Logic of Statistical Inference, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacking, I.: 1975, The Emergence of Probability, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harman, G.: 1965, `Inference to the Best Explanation’, The Philosophical Review 74, 88–95. Heiman, D. H. (ed.): 1988, Analogical Reasoning, Kluwer, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hempel, C. G.: 1965, Aspects of Scientific Explanation, The Free Press, New York. Hempel, C. G.: 1966, The Philosophy of Natural Science, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs. Hesse, M.: 1974, The Structure of Scientific Inference, Macmillan, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilpinen, R.: 1968, Rules of Acceptance and Inductive Logic, Acta Philosophica Fennica, North-Holland, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintikka, J.: 1968, `The Varieties of Information and Scientific Explanation’, in B. van Rootselar and J. E. Staal (eds.), Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science III, North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 151–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintikka, J.: 1973, Logic, Language-Games, and Information: Kantian Themes in the Philosophy of Logic, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintikka, J. and I. Niiniluoto: 1980, `An Axiomatic Foundation for the Logic of Inductive Generalization’, in Jeffrey, 1980, pp. 157–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintikka, J. and P. Suppes (eds.): 1966, Aspects of Inductive Logic, North-Holland, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintikka, J. and P. Suppes (eds.): 1970, Information and Inference,D. Reidel, Dordrecht. Hosiasson-Lindenbaum, J.: 1940, ‘On Confirmation’, The Journal of Symbolic Logic 5, 133148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howson, C.: 1995, `Theories of Probability’, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 46, 1–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howson, C. and P. Urbach: 1989, Scientific Reasoning: The Bayesian Approach, Open Court, La Salle.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hume, D.: 1902, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Clarendon Press, Oxford. Jeffrey, R.: 1965, The Logic of Decision, McGraw-Hill, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeffrey, R. (ed.): 1980, Studies in Inductive Logic and Probability, vol. II, University of California Press, Berkeley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeffrey, R.: 1992, Probability and the Art of Judgement, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jeffreys, H.: 1939, Theory of Probability, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, K.: 1996, The Logic of Reliable Inquiry, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keynes, J. M.: 1921, A Treatise on Probability, Macmillan, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuipers, T.: 1978, Studies in Inductive Probability and Rational Expectation, D. Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kyburg, H. E. and H. Smokier (eds.): 1964, Studies in Subjective Probability, John Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakatos, I. (ed.): 1968, The Problem of Inductive Logic, North-Holland, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakatos, I. and A. Musgrave (eds.): 1970, Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langley, P., H. A. Simon, G. L. Bradshaw, and J. M. Zytkow: 1987, Scientific Discovery: Computational Explorations on the Creative Processes, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laplace, P. S.: 1951, A Philosophical Essay on Probabilities, Dover, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laudan, L.: 1981, Science and Hypothesis, D. Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levi, I.: 1967, Gambling With Truth: An Essay on Induction and the Aims of Science, Alfred A. Knopf, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levi, I.: 1991, The Fixation of Belief and Its Undoing: Changing Beliefs through Inquiry, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, D.: 1980, ‘A Subjectivist’s Guide to Objective Chance’, in Jeffrey, 1980, pp. 263–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackie, J.: 1974, The Cement of the Universe: A Study of Causation, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magnani, L., N. Nersessian, and P. Thagard (eds.): 1999, Model-Based Reasoning in Scientific Discovery, Kluwer/Plenum, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayo, D.: 1996, Error and the Growth of Experimental Knowledge, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mill, J. S.: 1843, A System of Logic, Longmans, Green, and Co., London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D.: 1994, Critical Rationalism: A Restatement and Defence, Open Court, Chicago and La Salle, Ill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neyman, J.: 1977, `Frequentist Probability and Frequentist Statistics’, Synthese 36, 97–131. Nickles, T. (ed.): 1980, Scientific Discovery, Logic, and Rationality, D. Reidel, Dordrecht. Niiniluoto, I.: 1984, Is Science Progressive?, D. Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niiniluoto, I.: 1987, Truthlikeness, D. Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niiniluoto, I.: 1995, `Hintikka and Whewell on Aristotelian Induction’, Grazer philosophische Studien 49, 49–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niiniluoto, I.: 1999a, Critical Scientific Realism, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niiniluoto, I.: 1999b, `Defending Abduction’, Philosophy of Science 66 (Proceedings), S436 - S451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niiniluoto, I. and R. Tuomela: (1973), Theoretical Concepts and Hypothetico-Inductive Inference, D. Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peirce, C.S.: 1931–35, Collected Papers,vols. 1–6, C. Hartshorne and P. Weiss (eds.), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pietarinen, J.: 1970, `Quantitative Tools for Evaluating Scientific Systematizations’, in Hintikka and Suppes, 1970, pp. 123–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polya, G.: 1945, How to Solve It: A New Aspect of the Mathematical Method, Princeton University Press, Princeton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K.: 1957, `The Propensity Interpretation of the Calculus of Probability, and the Quantum Theory’, in S. Körner (ed.), Observation and Interpretation, Butterworth Scientific, London, pp. 65–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K.: 1959, The Logic of Scientific Discovery, Hutchinson, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K.: 1963, Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K.: 1972, Objective Knowledge (2nd ed. 1979 ), Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsey, F.: 1950, The Foundations of Mathematics, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reichenbach, H.: 1938, Experience and Prediction, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reichenbach, H.: 1949, The Theory of Probability, University of California Press, Berkeley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenkrantz, R.: 1977, Inference, Method and Decision: Toward a Bayesian Philosophy of Science, D. Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, W.D.: 1949, Aristotle’s Prior and Posterior Analysis, A Revised text with Introduction and Commentary, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salmon, W.: 1966, The Foundations of Scientific Inference, University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salmon, W.: 1984, Scientific Explanation and the Causal Structure of the World, Princeton University Press, Princeton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savage, L. J.: 1954, The Foundations of Statistics, Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seidenfeld: 1979, Philosophical Problems of Statistical Inference: Learning from R. A. Fisher, D. Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shafer, G.: 1976, A Mathematical Theory of Evidence, Princeton University Press, Princeton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shafer, G.: 1996, The Art of Causal Conjecture, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skyrms, B.: 1975, Choice and Chance: An Introduction to Inductive Logic, 2nd ed., Dickenson, Belmont.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skyrms, B.: 1987, `Dynamic Coherence and Probability Kinematics’, Philosophy of Science 54, 1–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stegmüller, W.: 1973, Personelle und statistische Wahrscheinlichkeit, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Strawson, P.: 1952, Introduction to Logical Theory, Methuen, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suppes, P.: 1984, Probabilistic Metaphysics, Blackwell, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swinburne, R. (ed.): 1974, Justification of Induction, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarski, A.: 1956, Logic, Semantics, Metamathematics, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venn, J.: 1866, The Logic of Chance, Macmillan, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Mises, R.: 1951, Probability, Statistics, and Truth, 2nd rev. ed., Allen and Unwin, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Plato, J.: 1994, Creating Modern Probability, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • von Wright, G. H.: 1951, A Treatise on Induction and Probability, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Wright, G. H.: 1957, The Logical Problem of Induction, 2nd ed., Blackwell, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whewell, W.: 1840, The Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences, John W. Parker and Sons, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whewell, W. 1860, On the Philosophy of Discovery,John W. Parker and Sons, London. (Reprinted by Lenox Hill, New York, 1971.)

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittgenstein, L.: 1922, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2004 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Niiniluoto, I. (2004). Induction. In: Niiniluoto, I., Sintonen, M., Woleński, J. (eds) Handbook of Epistemology. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-1986-9_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-1986-9_14

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-015-6969-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-1986-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics