Abstract
I said in the previous chapter that the inductive logic project would be too much to try to take on in a single chapter. As anyone knows who has undertaken to move that project ahead, this is an understatement. At the conclusion of that chapter, I proposed that the badness of hasty generalization should not be attributed to the badness of all inductions, hasty or not. This clearly presupposes that some inductions are good. How this assumption can be made to square with Hume’s infamous argument that induction as such lacks a justification is the business of the present chapter to determine. The reader may be puzzled by our decision to get this determination going by way of discussion of abduction, rather than induction. But, as will be seen, it is the right way to go.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Although it can be claimed with confidence that there are also non-explanationist variations on abductive reasoning, we shall not here require this more capacious conception. See [Gabbay and Woods, 2004, ch. 4] .
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2004 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Woods, J. (2004). The Problem of Abduction. In: The Death of Argument. Applied Logic Series, vol 32. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-2712-3_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-2712-3_20
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-6700-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-2712-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive