Plantinga, Alvin John A. O'Brien Professor of Philosophy, University of Notre Dame
Print publication date: 1993 (this edition)
Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: November 2003
Print ISBN-13: 978-0-19-507864-0







doi:10.1093/0195078640.003.0007

Alvin Plantinga
Abstract: Broadly taken, the term “induction” denotes our whole nondeductive procedure of acquiring, maintaining, and discarding beliefs about what is so far unobserved or undetected or unknown. In this chapter, I examine induction from the perspective of my account of warrant. I first take up what is now referred to as “the old riddle of induction,” rejecting David Hume's claim that inductive reasoning is not rationally justified and defending the view that beliefs formed on the basis of inductive reasoning can have warrant. I then turn to Nelson Goodman's ruminations on grue and the “new riddle of induction,” which is the question: what makes a property projectible? I reject Goodman's own solution to this problem, examine other inadequate solutions, and then suggest that an answer can be found by making reference to the proper function of the human intellect; projectible properties are just those properties that a properly functioning adult human being in our circumstances will in fact project.

Keywords: Nelson Goodman, grue, Hume, induction, new riddle of induction, old riddle of induction, proper function, warrant,

You have access to the abstract for this item.     You have access to the full text for this item.



 










Quick Search Form

 
scroll up fast
scroll up
 
scroll down
scroll down fast