Induction

Sir Karl Popper argued that science does not actually rely on induction and he developed the idea of falsification instead. He says that when assessing a theory one should pay more attention to the data that is in disagreement with the theory than with the data that is in agreement.

There are numerous things that we humans believe but have never directly observed. In the past, every time a book had been dropped, it fell to the floor. Something is observed over and over again therefore we know it will always occur this way. We know that science depends on induction, therefore if induction is irrational, so is all of science. In order to prove something is falsifiable it must be possible to conduct an experiment or observation that would show it false. sume that causation will continue as it has is to assume the future will be like the past. To Hume, the fact that we know if we drop a book it will fall to the floor is based on past experiences. For instance, we believe that gravity will keep us grounded, however this is something we cannot guarantee. However, scientists regard this law as infallible.

Hume concludes that no matter how reliably a law seems to have held in the past, there is no logical reason why it must do so in the future at all. Therefore we tend to believe that this pattern will be repeated. However, Hume believes that this is still circular reasoning because laws have been exception less up until now so how do we know that will continue.