The problem of induction is a philosophical dilemma that challenges the validity of knowledge gained through inductive inference introduced by Scottish philosopher David Hume. Inductive inference is a form of reasoning that allows a conclusion to be reached by looking at past experiences. To recognize what disturbs Hume, it is important to understand what deductive and inductive reasoning are. When reasoning moves from the general to the particular, it is often referred to as deductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning is a way of knowing through the conclusion that is drawn from the premises. Inductive reasoning is when reasoning moves from the particular to the general. The premises obviously are going to be opposite to that of deductive premises’ and the conclusion made from inductive reasoning is often a generalization from the observed to the unobserved and it is often referred to as inductive inference. The problem that Hume has is that the conclusions that arise from this reasoning is not ensured and that inductive inference cannot be justified deductively and inductively.
As mentioned before, inductive inference is when you reach a conclusion through the generalization of the observed to the unobserved. Hume’s main argument against inductive inference is that it cannot be justified. He stresses upon the fact that scientist rely on inductive reasoning for their discoveries and observations and it is impossible for anyone to be completely sure about it. It is important…