Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-cjp7w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-29T21:59:54.048Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hume, Norton, and Induction without Rules

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Thomas Kelly
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Does Hume's skeptical critique of inductive reasoning depend for its force on the assumption that such reasoning is a matter of following general rules? I explore this question in connection with John Norton's “Material Theory of Induction.”

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 77 , Issue 5 , December 2010 , pp. 754 - 764
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Lange, Marc. 2002. “Okasha on Inductive Skepticism.” Philosophical Quarterly 52:226–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipton, Peter. 1991. Inference to the Best Explanation. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norton, John. 2003. “A Material Theory of Induction.” Philosophy of Science 70:647–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norton, John. 2005. “A Little Survey of Induction.” In Scientific Evidence, ed. Achinstein, Peter, 9–34. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Okasha, Samir. 2001. “What Did Hume Really Show about Induction?” Philosophical Quarterly 51:307–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salmon, Wesley C. 1967. The Foundations of Scientific Inference. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar