But here you're assuming what you're trying to prove...
No, I'm not, because I'm not trying to prove anything. I'm attempting to justify using the principle of induction, but I'm not trying to prove it. Experience tells me it usually works, and that it's a good basis for predicting, say, which way gravity will operate in the next few seconds.
The principle of induction certainly cannot be proved with reference to evidence [1]. Are you using 'justified' synonymously with 'proved'? If so, then your response really doesn't seem like a reply to my comment, since I wasn't talking about proof at all. I was talking about axioms (which, by definition, we accept as given rather than prove), and about the evidence of my experiences (which isn't the same thing as proof, or anything like it in my lexicon).
[1] Nor, as far as I'm aware, can it be proved in any other way; that's the point, surely?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2009-01-06 11:22 pm (UTC)No, I'm not, because I'm not trying to prove anything. I'm attempting to justify using the principle of induction, but I'm not trying to prove it. Experience tells me it usually works, and that it's a good basis for predicting, say, which way gravity will operate in the next few seconds.
The principle of induction certainly cannot be proved with reference to evidence [1]. Are you using 'justified' synonymously with 'proved'? If so, then your response really doesn't seem like a reply to my comment, since I wasn't talking about proof at all. I was talking about axioms (which, by definition, we accept as given rather than prove), and about the evidence of my experiences (which isn't the same thing as proof, or anything like it in my lexicon).
[1] Nor, as far as I'm aware, can it be proved in any other way; that's the point, surely?