Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    The first horn of Hume's dilemma does not definitively pr... — Carmelics
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The first horn of Hume's dilemma does not definitively preclude an a priori argument for inductive inference

    Skepticism
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant's synthetic a priori demonstrates that non-trivial necessary truths about empirical structure are achievable without purely analytic reasoning.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The principle of the uniformity of nature can be reconstructed as a transcendental precondition for experience rather than an empirical generalization.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A transcendental argument establishing uniformity as constitutive of experience would be demonstrative yet immune to Hume's conceivability objection.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Carnap's inductive logic shows that logical probability relations between propositions can be determined a priori through confirmation theory.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If c(h,e)—the degree of confirmation of hypothesis h given evidence e—is a logical relation, it holds necessarily and is knowable without further empirical input.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The first horn only rules out demonstrative arguments to the certain conclusion of an inductive inference
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.It remains possible to construct a demonstrative argument establishing only that the conclusion of an inductive inference is probable or likely
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A probabilistic a priori argument would not be defeated by the mere conceivability of the negation of the conclusion
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Modality & Possibility2 linked

    Related

    A probabilistic a priori argument would not be defeated by the mere conceivabili...A transcendental argument establishing uniformity as constitutive of experience ...Carnap's inductive logic shows that logical probability relations between propos...If c(h,e)—the degree of confirmation of hypothesis h given evidence e—is a logic...
    +4 moreShow less
    It remains possible to construct a demonstrative argument establishing only that...Kant's synthetic a priori demonstrates that non-trivial necessary truths about e...The first horn only rules out demonstrative arguments to the certain conclusion ...The principle of the uniformity of nature can be reconstructed as a transcendent...

    Similar

    Hume's first horn of his dilemma rules out any a priori reasoning for ...83%The first horn only rules out demonstrative arguments to the certain c...82%A priori reasoning cannot justify inductive inference81%A purely a priori argument for inductive inference cannot be found via...79%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: induction-problem
    View source passageHide passage
    The first horn of Hume’s argument, as formulated above, is aimed at establishing that there is no demonstrative argument for the UP. There are several ways people have attempted to show that the first horn does not definitively preclude a demonstrative or a priori argument for inductive inferences. One possible escape route from the first horn is to deny premise P3, which amounts to admitting the possibility of synthetic a priori propositions (section 3.1). Another possibility is to attempt
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit