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
    There is no demonstrative argument for the uniformity pri... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    There is no demonstrative argument for the uniformity principle (UP)

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.It is possible to conceive of the negation of the conclusion of an inductive inference
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the negation of a conclusion is conceivable, no demonstrative argument can establish that conclusion with certainty
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant argues that the uniformity of nature is a synthetic a priori principle, grounded in the transcendental structure of possible experience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If UP is a condition of the possibility of experience rather than a contingent empirical claim, its negation is not merely inconceivable but transcendentally incoherent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A transcendentally incoherent negation cannot serve as Hume's criterion for the absence of a demonstrative argument, since that criterion presupposes empiricist constraints Kant rejects.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hume's conceivability criterion conflates logical possibility with the absence of rational justification, a conflation challenged by rationalist epistemology from Leibniz onward.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.P.F. Strawson argues that inductive inference is internally constitutive of what we mean by 'rationality', making demands for external justification of UP a category mistake.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If UP is analytically embedded in our concept of rational belief-formation, Hume's demand for a demonstrative argument misidentifies the logical status of the principle it seeks to justify.
      ?

      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 & Possibility1 linked

    Related

    A transcendentally incoherent negation cannot serve as Hume's criterion for the ...Hume's conceivability criterion conflates logical possibility with the absence o...If UP is a condition of the possibility of experience rather than a contingent e...If UP is analytically embedded in our concept of rational belief-formation, Hume...
    +4 moreShow less
    If the negation of a conclusion is conceivable, no demonstrative argument can es...It is possible to conceive of the negation of the conclusion of an inductive inf...Kant argues that the uniformity of nature is a synthetic a priori principle, gro...P.F. Strawson argues that inductive inference is internally constitutive of what...

    Similar

    The principle of the uniformity of nature is an absolute presuppositio...82%For many other analogical arguments, the underlying uniformity is uncl...82%The principle of the uniformity of nature is an absolute presuppositio...81%The principle of the uniformity of nature is neither a proposition abo...80%

    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 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit