Hume's Problem of Induction

Will the sun rise tomorrow? The answer seems simple: an emphatic “Yes!” But how do you know? We can imagine the following commonsense response: “Well, every morning, the sun rises; atleast from my perspective. Wait until tomorrow; you’ll see!” The reasoning is that, based on past observations, we know that the sun will more than likely rise in the morning. Notice that this conclusion is not certain: the argument is not a purely logical deduction. There are, after all unlikely science fiction scenarios where the sun is suddenly destroyed. These scenarios show that the claim the sun will rise in the morning is possibly false. Despite this, there seems to be a very good probability that it will rise.
In his Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding (1748), David Hume (1711-1776) asserts that even this argument is not good. Hume thinks the skeptical answer – ‘We Don’t Know!’ – is the logical response to this sort of inductive (past-experience-based) argument. For him, we ought to withhold belief on inductive assertions about the future, even over such likely questions as whether the sun will rise in the morning. But perhaps this does not seem right to you: We all know that the sun will rise in the morning, don’t we?
Let’s see how Hume gets to his conclusion.
The ‘Future Will Resemble the Past’ Principle
Imagine someone playing a game of pool. She hits the cue ball, and it collides with the eight ball. What should happen next?
Based on past experience, one would think that the eight ball will travel in a straight line away from the cue ball until impeded by another object. But this is only one hypothesis. Consider the following alternative hypotheses:
Esta historia es de la edición February/March 2024 de Philosophy Now.
Comience su prueba gratuita de Magzter GOLD de 7 días para acceder a miles de historias premium seleccionadas y a más de 9,500 revistas y periódicos.
Ya eres suscriptor ? Conectar
Esta historia es de la edición February/March 2024 de Philosophy Now.
Comience su prueba gratuita de Magzter GOLD de 7 días para acceder a miles de historias premium seleccionadas y a más de 9,500 revistas y periódicos.
Ya eres suscriptor? Conectar

Affirmative Action for Androids
Jimmy Alfonso Licon asks, when should we prioritise android rights?

Welcome to the Civilization of the Liar's Paradox
Slavoj Žižek uncovers political paradoxes of lying.

The Importance of the Purple
Massimo Pigliucci looks for threads of integrity in a morally compromised world.

Ethics for the Age of AI
Mahmoud Khatami asks, can machines make good moral decisions?

Anand Vaidya (1976-2024)
Manjula Menon on the short but full career of a 'disciplinary trespasser'.

Studying Smarter with AI?
Max Gottschlich on sense and nonsense when using AI in academia.

Excusing God
Raymond Tallis highlights the problem of evil.

Stephen Fry
Perhaps unshockingly for someone who is an actor, broadcaster, comedian, director, narrator and writer, Stephen Fry has a deep interest in words and how we use them. After hearing him lecture on that subject, Marcel Steinbauer-Lewis asked him about Artificial Intelligence and how it connects with the extraordinary lure of language.

Is VR Meaningful Escapism?
Amir Haj-Bolouri enquires into possible meaning through technology.

What Simone de Beauvoir Got — And Didn't Get – About Motherhood
Nura Hossainzadeh argues that motherhood is both physical and transcendent.