Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T07:09:44.492Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Place of Induction in Science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

Mario Bunge
Mario Bunge*
Affiliation:
University of Buenos Aires
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The place of induction in the framing and test of scientific hypotheses is investigated. The meaning of ‘induction’ is first equated with generalization on the basis of case examination. Two kinds of induction are then distinguished: the inference of generals from particulars (first degree induction), and the generalization of generalizations (second degree induction). Induction is claimed to play a role in the framing of modest empirical generalizations and in the extension of every sort of generalizations—not however in the invention of high-level hypotheses containing theoretical predicates. It is maintained, on the other hand, that induction by enumeration is essential in the empirical test of the lowest-level consequences of scientific theories, since it occurs in the drawing of “conclusions” from the examination of empirical evidence. But it is also held that the empirical test is insufficient, and must be supplemented with theorification, or the expansion of isolated hypotheses into theories. Refutation is not viewed as a substitute for confirmation but as its complement, since the very notion of unfavorable case is meaningful only in connection with the concept of positive instance. Although the existence of an inductive method is disclaimed, it is maintained that the various patterns of plausible reasoning (inductive inference included) are worth being investigated. It is concluded that scientific research follows neither the advice of inductivism nor the injunction of deductivism, but takes a middle course in which induction is instrumental both heuristically and methodologically, although the over-all pattern of research is hypothetico-deductive.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 27 , Issue 3 , July 1960 , pp. 262 - 270
Copyright
Copyright © 1959 by Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

∗∗

Slightly modified version of a paper read at the 6th Inter American Congress of Philosophy, Buenos Aires, August-September, 1959.

References

1. Keynes, J. M. A Treatise on Probability (London, Macmillan, 1921).Google Scholar
2. Reichenbach, H. The Theory of Probability (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1949).Google Scholar
3. Carnap, R. Logical Foundations of Probability (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1950).Google Scholar
4. Jeffreys, , Scientific Inference (Cambridge: University Press, 1931 and 1957).Google Scholar
5. Duhem, P. La théorie physique, 2nd ed. (Paris: Rivière, 1914).Google Scholar
6. Popper, K. R. The Logic of Scientific Discovery (London: Hutchinson, 1959).Google Scholar
7. Wisdom, J. O. Foundations of Inference in Natural Science (London: Methuen, 1952).Google Scholar
8. Polya, G. Mathematics and Plausible Reasoning (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1954), 2 vols.Google Scholar
9. Kneale, W. Probability and Induction (Oxford: University Press, 1949 and 1952).Google Scholar
10. Bunge, M. “¿Cómo sabemos que existe la atmósfera ?”, Revista de la Universidad de Buenos Aires, IV, 246 (1959).Google Scholar
11. Russell, B. Human Knowledge (London: Allen & Unwin, 1948).Google Scholar
12. Bunge, M. Review of reference 6, Ciencia e Investigación, 15, 216, (1959).Google Scholar
13. Braithwaite, R. B. Scientific Explanation (Cambridge: University Press, 1953).Google Scholar
14. Bunge, M. Metascientific Queries (Springfield, Ill.: Charles Thomas, 1959).Google Scholar
15. Bunge, M. “Análisis epistemológico del principio de Arquímedes” (Buenos Aires: Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, 1958), rotaprinted.Google Scholar
16. Fischer, R. A. The Design of Experiments (Edinburgh and London: Oliver and Boyd, 1935 and 1951).Google Scholar
17. Wright, G. H. von. The Logical Problem of Induction, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Blackwell, 1957).Google Scholar
18. Czerwinski, Z. “Statistical Inference, Induction and Deduction”, Studia Logica, 7, 243 (1958).Google Scholar
19. Goodman, N. Fact, Fiction, & Forecast (London: University of London, The Athlone Press, 1954).Google Scholar
20. Barker, S. F. Induction and Hypothesis (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1957).Google Scholar
21. Einstein, A. “Remarks on the Theory of Knowledge of Bertrand Russell”, in Schilpp, P. A. (ed.), The Philosophy of Bertrand Russell (N. York: Tudor, 1944 an 1951).Google Scholar