Induction: The Most Enduring Problems Of Epistemology

The ‘problem of induction’ has proven to be one of the most enduring problems of epistemology. Since it was first conceived by David Hume, countless philosophers have grappled with the challenge to solve or dissolve the problem.The basic problem of induction can be summarized as follows: suppose that we observe a large number of objects with characteristic “A”, keeping in mind that all of them also possess characteristic “B”. It is natural for us to conclude that, in all probability, that the objects with trait “A” will also carry trait “B” — including those objects with “A” that have yet to be observed or are not able to be observed. One example to consider is that of an emu, as provided by Pritchard in Chapter 9 of the textbook. The inference …show more content…
Reichenbach agrees with Hume that there is no justification for induction. However, he argues that it is nevertheless rational to make inductive inferences. In essence, his theory is that induction is rational because if we don’t employ induction then we are guaranteed to end up with very few true beliefs about the world, while if we do use induction then we at least have the change to form lots of true beliefs about the world through our inductive inferences. That is, if anything is going to work, then it is going to be induction, so it is in the sense rational to use induction, even though we have no justification for thinking that it does work. Reichenbach therefore offers a practical-or pragmatic-response to the problem of induction, rather than an epistemic response as seen by Hume (page 107). An example provided to support Reichenbach’s argument is one based of a famous documentary made in 2003, Touching the Void. It retells a real-life incident involving two mountain climbers who face a tragedy when one of them has an accident on the mountain Siula Grande in the Peruvian Andes. In the climax of the film, one of the main protagonists has to make a choice between certain death and the unknown when he falls deep into the heart of a glacier and is now hanging there in the darkness, unable, due to injuries, to climb out. The choice he is faced with is to either hang there in the darkness until he eventually passes out and dies or to cut the rope and fall even further into the darkness of the glacier. For all he knows, the fall could kill him, but, equally, there is a possibility that he could survive the fall. The gamble pays off in the end as he survives the fall and finds a way out of the glacier. Now, according to Reichenbach, the choice made by this climber is essentially the same as that facing us regarding induction as he argues that it is more prudent to ‘bet’ on inductive