Hume's Problem of Induction

Подписаться 1,4 тыс.

Просмотров 32 тыс.

50% 1

Hello everyone,
It’s been quite a while since my last video! I haven’t been able to make philosophy videos in a while simply because I have had a lot of things happen in my personal life that have prevented me from being able to make videos for this channel. So please excuse how rusty my lecture-giving skills are! Also, I know my explanation might be a little redundant, but one of my main goals as philosopher is to try to break things down in such a way so that even a child could understand at least some of the concepts. So when I make these videos, I always try to keep that in mind. Thank you so much for watching! Feel free to leave questions, comments, criticisms, down below.
Instagram: @Philosophermit / philosophermit
Twitter: @Philosophermit / philosophermit
Also, feel free to check out my second channel where I post cinematic travel videos! The channel name is Roaminders.
all footage images used in this video are used legally for criticism, commentary & education, and are protected by the Fair Use Law/Act: Section 107 of the USC: www.copyright.gov/legislation...
Instagram: @Roaminders / roaminders
Twitter: @Roaminders / roaminders
Facebook: @Roaminders / roaminders
References
Hume, David. “An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding”. Hackett Publishing Company, Inc. First edition published in 1977.
Hume, David. “A Treatise of Human Nature”. Oxford University Press, Inc. Second Edition, Published in 2009.
Wireless Philosophy, Daniel Greco. “Epistemology: Hume’s Skepticism and Induction Part 2”. www.wi-phi.com/video/humes-ske.... From Wi-Phi. Published on Nov 28, 2014. Date accessed: 21 Feb 2017

Кино

Опубликовано:

23 июл 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 164

@Pizaerable 4 года назад

I think induction thinking is more of an evolutionary adaptation that allowed certain organisms to think in a way to create models of their external world via their sensory systems in order for them to 'problem solve' complex situations to survive. This caused humans to believe such thinking is 'objective', given that it has been installed in us instinctively

@philosophermit8215 4 года назад

YES! You’re completely correct. Love the way you worded this. I really should have emphasized this more in my video, but I was in a bit of a rush towards the end trying to get the video out. If I can figure out how to pin your comment, I’ll go ahead and do that when I get home (currently in the car)!! Thanks for your input, Yeeeeeeet! Thanks for still staying subscribed even though I haven’t posted in a while. I recognized you from comments on some of my other videos :). Hope all is well with you.

@philosophermit8215 4 года назад

Ok I figured it out lol! 😂 Guess I didn’t need to be on my laptop to pin the comment.

@Pizaerable 4 года назад

@@philosophermit8215 Lool dont worry. Recently I was interested in western philosophy and the idea of logical thinking, and eastern philosophy with the idea of knowing yourself i.e. the way we feel and think. I like the idea of linking them with evolutionary psychology to really truly understand why we think and feel in a certain way, and if such thinking and feeling a certain emotion has any flaws. And also how has society shaped the way we think as well and does it work with our current primitive brain that evolved to try to solve. Anyways am going off tangent here keep up the with good work. And yeah I used to be that cow in my profile pic. I click straight away if I see a philosophical-related on my subscription list lol

@Pizaerable 4 года назад

*solve --> survive

@farhanurmiah2635 3 года назад

Tanks

@dedgar6161 3 года назад

started taking a philosophy class for the first time and this channel is gold. Saved me from reading 60 pages on induction that was worded in a confusing manner

@tomyout5952 2 месяца назад

Honestly, I was trying to figure Hume out on this. This video is the single best video explaining Hume on Induction.

@UglyStru 3 года назад

Fantastic quality on this video. I just needed this for a philosophy class but based on this quality, I HAVE to subscribe. Thank you for this!

@AJ-ib3re 2 года назад

I really enjoyed this video. In all my time studying philosophy I have never heard Hume explained so succinctly and accurately. I hope you continue to make videos!

@philosophermit8215 2 года назад

At this point I've probably been putting out one video per year hahaha, but I do hope to continue making videos on this channel at some point. Life's been a little wild lately, but this comment really encouraged me to try and start this channel back up again. Thank you so, so much! :-)

@AJ-ib3re 2 года назад

@@philosophermit8215 Im glad to have encouraged! I'll keep my eyes peeled for my videos :) (even if its yearly)

@sarahjess4233 3 года назад

This video is so helpful, I currently have an essay due tomorrow and my lecturer stipulated that we clearly must explain humes problem of induction. I was struggling to fork the correct words, but this helped :) thank you

@anwarkamal2500 2 года назад

Very clear explanation on a very very important issue that roused Immanuel Kant from his dogmatic slumber. Nicely done, much appreciated.

@13e11even11 2 года назад

I loved your video. Have always admired Humes skepticism, and thought of an extension to this argument where even given a stable universe and the idea of future resembling the past those components contained within resemblance can not all be understood or anticipated. The sun always rising is clear and easy to understand, however the rate of slowing and the inherent change to slowing or accelerating or by definition change, present a whole different set of problems, within this framework.

@guochunli8829 2 года назад

You are just awesome, this video is well made and packed with on-point information! I'm on my way to binge watching your videos:) Keep up the good work!

@whoathatsalotofdamage3718 3 года назад

I'm really impressed with both the editing quality and overall production level you put into the video, great job! I think generally, a lot of reasoning can boil down to intuitiveness, which is really just a fancy word for pattern recognition and ascription. Like another commentor stated, it has legitimate evolutionary usage in keeping things generally alive, but is largely unfounded. To question the immutability of natural law and constants is pretty foundational to science. We have quantum mechanics being observed where these constants break down and are no longer true, and in psychology you have the nature v. Nurture argument which has now been rendered a bit simpler with our understanding of epigenetics. Question your reality, it's how we make strides as humanity!

@SOULJAJOE010 4 года назад

Excellent video! I'm really amazed by the scenes and editing as well as the knowledge of what you're saying of course :D Also! Welcome back, I saw this video after checking your past videos and saw the recent upload, Im gonna sub, I like this content. I haven't read a lot on philosophy but so far for the year I believe I read at least 1 or 2 books on philosophy

@philosophermit8215 4 года назад

Thank you so much, Jospeh! This honestly means the world. I was a bit nervous to post this video, seeing as it's been a while since I have posted a video or really given any kind of lecture. So glad you enjoyed it!

@deepakkumarchand4479 3 года назад

Your channel is truly a gem 💎 Thanks for this chapter.

@azskater09 4 года назад

Did I just watch a video of myself giving a lecture on Hume’s problem of induction to myself? Yes, indeed, I think I did. Lol. Excellent job, my recently discovered doppelgänger 👍👌😂😁

@philosophermit8215 4 года назад

Haha this is so crazy!! You actually have two doppelgängers then because I have an identical twin sister!!! Hahaha you must be our long-lost triplet 😝! Thank you for watching, I’m so glad you enjoyed.

@azskater09 4 года назад

Philosophermit Wow, there’s three of us? This day just keeps getting better! And absolutely! I actually just recently discovered your channel, and you have some great content. Also, your editing was very good. I found the subtitles to be very helpful. I also, see you have some familiar philosophical/intellectual faces in the comments with the likes of @King Crocoduck and @Andrew T, so I know I must be in the right place. I’ll be sure to subscribe! 💖🙏🏼

@philosophermit8215 4 года назад

So glad the subtitles helped! I added them in because subtitles often help me when I’m watching videos too. Thank you for subscribing! 😊

@lamees4307 3 года назад

Thanks, you explained it in a simple way yet so informative!

@cancelled_user 4 года назад

Helloooo! Where you've been? Welcome back :) I discovered your channel a couple of weeks ago and I noticed the last video was already 2 years old. I subscribed anyway and... voilaaa! A new video is here :) I'll watch it in the morning. Going to bed now.

@philosophermit8215 4 года назад

Hi there, Kyle! Thank you so much for watching and subscribing :). Yes, it’s been a pretty long time since my last video! The reason I haven’t uploaded in two years is just because there’s been a lot of things that have happened in my personal life that have prevented me from being able to make videos for this channel. Luckily, I have a lot more free time now and so I am hoping to make more videos ASAP!! I’m so glad you stuck around even though I haven’t uploaded in so long. Also, It’s been a while since I have made a video, so please excuse my rusty lecture-giving skills 😛. I hope you enjoy it though! Let me know what you think!!

@timouradjiev3529 3 года назад

Quick, correct, and concise. Thank you lots!!

@loveirusu8788 4 года назад

this is a good production, keep it up!

@Nosfastus 3 года назад

Finally someone who can explain it... Thank you.

@Akhilkumar-fe4bi 3 года назад

Thank you for such a clear explanation.😊 Love from India 🇮🇳

@iamwasd3530 2 года назад

This five minute video saved me HOURS of reading a bunch of boring, confusing material. Thank you!!!

@philosophermit8215 2 года назад

You're welcome :-)!

@subhashrawat7321 3 года назад

Well explained..loved this concept

@JustinMinoruLeachonLuna Год назад

Umderstanding this is quite hard but your explanation helped me come to an understanding.

@ivy7982 Год назад

you have actually saved me so much stress! thank you :)

@Rk-9409 Год назад

brilliant explanation mam....please continue such initiatve....

@chuckgaydos5387 2 года назад

My justification for using inductive reasoning is that it's all I know how to do. Since it's worked so well for my entire life I never learned to get along in any other environment. If it stops working then I'm in serious trouble whether I use it or not, so I should continue to use it in case it keeps working.

@deepchillasmr6319 3 года назад

Never heard or really thought about this but wow and yes!

@AnkitKumar-vj1pk 4 года назад

Wow! You have so beautifully explained it.

@philosophermit8215 3 года назад

Thank you! I am glad it made sense!!

@rajesharjunan5495 2 года назад

Please upload more videos like this .it will be helpful to people like me

@jaydatomlinson4406 3 года назад

This video helped so much! Thank you

@pauljohnson7791 11 месяцев назад

It seems a lot of our reasoning is induction. I'm not leaning on skepticism of reality or truth, but rather thinking about the things we say and do and our bases for them. It seems to me there is a spectrum of "likelihood" upon which we grade our inductions and those of others. In my life, the further I got from absolutes and the closer I got to accepting that induction exists and is widely used, the calmer I became and the world seemed. :)

@faizanfarooq5759 3 года назад

Amazingly explained and well edited video.

@philosophermit8215 3 года назад

Thank you so much! Will try my best to keep producing content like this 😊

@chantecabantog8569 3 года назад

Life saver for my philosophy class 🤧

@pyontasansan 2 года назад

Well done video and great job illustrating the point. Similarly, if I were to induce that Isa's dog would disappear every time she said "natural thing that we do" (@ 5:02), it wouldn't be rational- but it would be a good tool to use when watching this video. Keep the videos coming!

@danpdalmonte1092 2 года назад

Nicely done. I like the music and the images you use. I think you could have defined the two types of reasoning Hume gives, demonstrative and moral reasoning. But, you explained it in a compelling way that made it interesting. You are also very pretty :)

@philosophermit8215 2 года назад

Thank you so much, Dan! Glad you enjoyed the video :-)!

@WiIfredOwen 3 года назад

Great video. Currently reading the foundations of scientific inference by W.C. Salmon. This video was useful. Subscribed.

@philosophermit8215 3 года назад

I am so happy to hear that you found my video useful!!

@danielleaquino5237 3 года назад

omg! Thank you so much! I was having such a hard time trying to comprehend this!!!

@philosophermit8215 3 года назад

You're so welcome! I am glad it made sense :)!!!

@thegreatconstipation8208 4 года назад

I like that you make video once a year

@philosophermit8215 4 года назад

thanks, man. I try

@anjaliparihar6124 3 года назад

Thank you, it was really easy to understand

@giftchidinma3444 2 года назад

Wow, this was really helpful, thank you lots🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼

@christiancarrasco1491 2 года назад

Great video!

@theweekndincludesthursdays8016 3 года назад

My God, you are a queen.

@philosophermit8215 3 года назад

Thank you!!!! :D

@MartaniPanganSehat 2 года назад

Thank you.

@EugeneMedved 4 года назад

Great work, keep it up!

@philosophermit8215 4 года назад

Thank you so much, Eugene! :-) will do!

@Beat519 2 года назад

This saved my life ❤️ ❤️

@JavierBonillaC 10 месяцев назад

Objects you showed fall towards he ground not to the ground. Some land in a cup or a glass. But your video is very good. Your examples are very clear, coherent and succinct. Congratulations.

@lettersfromanihilist9092 4 года назад

Your back!

@philosophermit8215 4 года назад

I sure am! Thank you so much for sticking around even while I wasn’t posting. I’m hoping to make some more videos ASAP :-).

@myjciskate4 4 года назад

Why do I feel like a video with you And Cosmic Skeptic would be very informative and fun to watch?

@philosophermit8215 4 года назад

That would be AWESOME! I am such a huge fan of his! Thanks for watching, Andrew.

@readandrap283 4 года назад

Andrew T Wow, King Crocoduck and Andrew T are in the comments? Is this some sort of intellectual secret gathering I stumbled upon? I feel honored. 🙏🏼🙏🏼😂

@philosophermit8215 4 года назад

Hi there! I’m so glad you enjoyed my video. It’s been a while since I have uploaded, so I was a bit nervous to see what people would think of the content. Thank you so much for the wonderful comments :)!

@myjciskate4 4 года назад

@@readandrap283 Haha. I am no where near the popularity of someone like King Crocoduck, but I appreciate the compliment. I just happen to know a few popular science and philosophy you-tubers lol.

@myjciskate4 4 года назад

@@philosophermit8215 I was definitely impressed with the quality of the videos. It's very rare to see such quality from smaller channels. If you don't mind me asking, do you teach philosophy, or did you major in some philosophy related field? You seem to have a very good understanding of the field, in general. You remind me of Cosmic Skeptic in many ways. I'll try to spread the word on your channel. I think your channel has quite a lot of potential for the future. Content like this often doesn't go unnoticed for long. Keep up the good work.

@jamesgall475 2 года назад

thank you!

@KingCrocoduck 4 года назад

It has never been clear to me why people treat inductive reasoning as though it were uniquely unfounded. Deductive and abductive reasoning are similarly foundationless, with the former operating entirely on the basis of arbitrary axioms, and the latter formally affirming the consequent.

@philosophermit8215 4 года назад

That's an incredibly interesting point there! I think you're totally right. I'd love to dig deeper into those topics for sure.

@myjciskate4 4 года назад

King Crocoduck My line of thought is similar. It seems that those who treat inductive reasoning as it is uniquely unfounded tend to have some sort of agenda to push. For instance, creationists and Christian Apologists often bring this up as if it were some kind of "gotcha" point, but in reality other forms of reason are foundation less, as you stated.

@antipositivism3128 3 года назад

Arbitrary axioms? You have failed to substantiate that assertion.

@antipositivism3128 3 года назад

Deductive reasoning unlike inductive reasoning is not questioned on the basis of the method of reasoning but on the premises contained in the deductions.

@maloxi1472 3 года назад

That's bs. Abduction isn't "affirming the consequent"

@maxpercer7119 Год назад

can you solve the problem of induction (suggestion idea for video) - its one of the most interesting problems in philosophy.

@BluebutterflyofJune 2 года назад

Hello. Nice video ! And we’ll explained ! What about the variables that influences the conclusion of an experiment. Example of the apple : The apple keep on falling because of the way it is placed, for instance it is more inclined towards the ground, therefore the conclusion will be if I keep on placing the apple in a certain angle it will always fall but if I place it in a another angle it will never fall. Can we simply ignore those multiple variables that influences the outcome of an experiment ?

@herbertharrison3948 3 года назад

Thank you!

@ExistentialistDasein 4 года назад

Excellent video: You're back with a bang! Good job! Did you make the video yourself?

@philosophermit8215 4 года назад

Hi!!! Long time no speak 😝. Thank you so much for sticking around! Yes, I edited the video myself. I did not film the footage though. I used a stock footage program called ArtGrid. Kinda pricey, but the footage is great!

@ExistentialistDasein 4 года назад

@@philosophermit8215 Yes, it's been a long time. I was wondering what you were up to:D Are you studying philosophy as a major now, or is it just a hobby? Aha, good to know. Thanks for the info.

@philosophermit8215 4 года назад

I actually graduated with my bachelors in Philosophy last year. I am currently preparing for the GRE (probably taking it in June or July), and I should be applying to graduate school sometime this fall! :)

@ExistentialistDasein 4 года назад

@@philosophermit8215 That's excellent! I hope you'd continue with the videos here. And thanks for replying:) By the way, just added you on Instagram; @johannesabsurdus is me.

@philosophermit8215 4 года назад

@@ExistentialistDasein WOW! Is that your art? It is absolutely incredible! I especially love the drawings of Popper, Russell, and Schopenhauer :D

@frederickgorski9049 2 года назад

@andrewdavidson8167 Год назад

Thank you for the video. I did have a question. Is induction the process of nature, or is it merely a method of inference? I have heard people talk about induction as if it was an abstract object but that doesn’t seem correct Thank you again for the video

@erinpark9014 3 года назад

Thank you!!!!

@amandaandile2199 3 года назад

Thank you😭😭

@angelowilson6082 3 года назад

thank you

@nuckinfuts7502 3 года назад

Hi, would you happen to have an email I can reach out to you on? Or you can just answer a question I have here. So is this the problem that Hume pointed out that Immanuel Kant is responding to in his Critique of Pure Reason or is there something else that Kant is responding to?

@maxpercer7119 Год назад

4:32 nice sound effect, suggestion to add also an 'oof' sound

@1samc Год назад

Although inductive reasoning may be inaccurate, it’s the price we pay for having organized thoughts that are not all over the place…imagine always questioning whether an object will fall or not every time you open your hand

@MrBomoro 3 года назад

Hey Philosophermit! How did you produce your Intro? Its amazing! :)

@philosophermit8215 2 года назад

Sorry for the extremely late reply! I used an editing system called Filmora for this, they have a lot of different animation features that helped me create the intro. Thanks for the compliment!! :-)

@randomvide1 2 года назад

Nice

@elfavs7923 2 года назад

Pls can teach on Skepticsm and solipsism

@minashinwarie5837 3 года назад

Hey have u uploaded the script of this video to google or anywhere online ??

@philosophermit8215 3 года назад

Hi Mina, no I have not! I'm sorry about that. I don't usually upload my video scripts anywhere, but maybe that is a possibility for future videos. Hope you enjoyed the video!

@benquinneyiii7941 Год назад

Scandalous

@cthoadmin7458 3 месяца назад

Do we need to test an observation repeatedly to infer a rule? I stuck a knitting needle into a power outlet as a young child. Once was enough to infer causality!

@KingCrocoduck 4 года назад

Long time no see

@philosophermit8215 4 года назад

HEY there, It's been forever!!! How have you been? I hope all has been well :-). I'm so glad I finally got a new video out. Hoping to get back into the swing of things here soon. I feel so rusty!

@lettersfromanihilist9092 4 года назад

Ur one to talk, u haven’t posted in 7 months! We miss you dude

@shanesmith734 2 года назад

I love your content, and you’re quite attractive. that combo earned you a subscriber.

@tatendamachingauta8102 3 года назад

kool

@benquinneyiii7941 Год назад

Scientific method

@prtauvers 3 года назад

In geology, we face this problem all the time: Is the present the key to the past? ...and careers have been built or destroyed by this assumption. But that’s what science is about - gathering more examples, doing the tests, seeing what happens...to me, induction is a tool for testing hypotheses, not a prescriptive dogma.

@humeanrgmnt7367 2 года назад

Yes, but inductive reasoning is a dead end. Science can never answer metaphysical questions because science really isn't knowledge.

@prtauvers 2 года назад

@@humeanrgmnt7367 - Science knows how to safely land a wheeled robot on Mars…how is that not knowledge?

@humeanrgmnt7367 2 года назад

@@prtauvers Do you know without assumption and with absolute certainty that you will always land on Mars safely? If not, then you have no knowledge. Just an assumption.

@prtauvers 2 года назад

@@humeanrgmnt7367 -if I don’t, a scientist will figure out why that happened.

@humeanrgmnt7367 2 года назад

@@prtauvers What if they do 'figure it out' as you claim, but the rover keeps crashing? Cheers, but I think you are missing the point.

@trifahasan1485 3 года назад

plase answer me did you have instagram or snap chat

@maxpercer7119 Год назад

If the universe becomes unstable, or non uniform, the habit of being inductive about the future will become less of a habit? That seems to be a conclusion if we follow hume's line of logic. You could start adding provisos or caveats to every statement about the future ,e.g. " if the past has any bearing on the future then the sun should rise tomorrow, but it won't necessarily rise by logical necessity". If you take this Hume stuff too literally and made an effort not to exercise the 'habit' of induction, let's say as a philosophical experiment, you would have to live in a constant state of bewilderment or surprise since the future would be completely unpredictable.

@ThinkTwice2222 3 года назад

To me, Induction answers the question "what does science do?" While Popper answers the question "what is science itself?"... Thoughts?

@humeanrgmnt7367 2 года назад

well, science is certainly not knowledge. Science is based on 'animal' faith, instinct and belief. Science is really a dead end when it comes to knowledge; science is full of assumptions and will never get us to certainty.

@joekopsick1540 Год назад

Everybody knows apples don't fall to the ground on Wednesdays

@Homo_sAPEien 2 года назад

The reason why we consider many different actions to be the same action, to begin with, is because of similarities of these actions. And, these similarities of the actions can account for the consistency of the results. And, they must account for said consistency, if it is not a complete coincidence, which would be highly unlikely. Therefore, we must conclude that the common nature of these things is completely responsible for the results, and, therefore, that the same results will happen in any future situation.

@ferrer497 4 года назад

Hey))

@lewis72 Год назад

The statement "future behaviour will be the same as past behaviour has no grounding" is proven false billions upon billions of time every second.

@p1dragon982 3 года назад

You look beautiful

@EddieVBlueIsland 4 месяца назад

Who cares if A does not follow B all the time or only in ergodic systems? we would simply make a construct to rationalize the new truth? - in fact that may be why we have paradoxes! - the wrong or inaccurate construct will lead to a paradox.

@klyddkross Год назад

Okay, I'm sorry... why does this, super intelligent, knowledgeable woman, have too be so damned attractive? I apologize, please continue my lesson...❤

@TheBanjoShowOfficial 2 года назад

Approaching induction from a basis of scientific foundation, such as regarding gravity, laws of thermodynamics, physical laws of the universe, you can say yes, it makes sense to use inductive reasoning. It is literally why we have computers. You cannot use inductive reasoning for systems that are too complex to accurately measure with any degree of certainty, like another human being. You cannot assume Jim will be nice tomorrow because he was nice all week, you can only predict that it will be maybe likely, but you cannot say with certainty that it will be so because Jim is an amalgamation of several thousands of systems that all have variables external and internal. You inductively know a thing will fall, but you cannot inductively know that Jim will throw a ball back to you a 12th time. It is impossible. Hume's argument is absolutely and utterly pointless to assume anything other than what we can observe and reason with our senses as a collective species. We are not God, we cannot play God. Yes, the Earth can spontaneously explode tomorrow, but that does not change the fact that neither you nor I could stop it, and even more so, that we could even prove such a thing could happen, when all of the evidence we have prior points to being- "No, the Earth is likely not going to explode tomorrow." All that we have is our senses and evidence.

@Google_Censored_Commenter 2 года назад

the argument isn't supposed to convince you to abandon inductive reasoning, merely to raise your skepticism, and not claim it to be necessary or absolutely certain.

@AK-iy2xg 13 дней назад

Sorry but I already have my own problems, I can’t bother with Hume’s problem atm.

@RedefineLiving 2 года назад

If it is the case that the biblical worldview is true, there is an all powerful Creator God Who implements and imposes these laws onto His creation, and then reveals it to be the case. We can put the biblical worldview on one side of the demarcation line, and the non-biblical worldview on the other.