Ph103: Discussion Questions 8

Short Answer Questions

1. Describe two different responses to Hume's problem of induction.
2. What is the difference between an emerald that is green and an object that is "grue"?
3. How does Popper distinguish science from "pseudoscience"?

For Further Discussion

• The "logical" response to Hume's problem. The core of the logical response is to say that when a hypothesis logically implies some observed evidence, then we can infer that this hypothesis is true.
  • Give some examples of how one can confirm the hypothesis "Fire is hot" using this approach.
  • Consider the hypothesis, "All swans are white." This implies that if something is a swan, then it is white. How does this implication allow one to confirm the hypothesis is true?
  
  • Note that the same hypothesis also implies that if something is not white, then it is not a swan. How does this implication allow one to confirm that the hypothesis is true? Give a few examples; there are many.
  • What's wrong with saying that this latter example counts as confirmation that the hypothesis is true? What does this say about the logical response to Hume's problem?
• Green and Grue. Choose any form of induction: enumerative induction, naive inductivism, the logical response, Popper's falsificationism, etc.
  • What does that form of induction allow us to infer about green emeralds?
  • What does it allow us to infer about "grue" emeralds?
  • For many inductive arguments, the inductive inference provides strong reason to believe the conclusion is probably true. Show how this leads to a contradiction for the forms of induction discussed above.
  • Is there any way out? What is the correct response to the grue-green problem?
• Final writing tip. Regarding essays, please have a look at my 7 Steps to a Better Philosophy Paper, especially the "Top 10 tips" at the end.