Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2(pesnta.1.2) 9/5/84; site scc.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!decvax!decwrl!amd!fortune!hpda!hplabs!pesnta!scc!steiny From: steiny@scc.UUCP (Don Steiny) Newsgroups: net.ai Subject: Re: induction vs. deduction Message-ID: <156@scc.UUCP> Date: Mon, 17-Sep-84 12:03:48 EDT Article-I.D.: scc.156 Posted: Mon Sep 17 12:03:48 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 25-Sep-84 03:27:53 EDT References: <12075@sri-arpa.UUCP> Organization: Personetics, Inc. - Santa Cruz, Calif. Lines: 24 *** A point about logical induction that has not come up is what Charles Sanders Peirce (who coined the term "pragmatism") argued that one could never prove anything inductively. We believe that any human will die eventurally and we reason that is so inductively. We do not, however, have records on every human that has ever existed, and humans that are still alive offer no evidence to support the statement "all humans die". Peirce (being pragmatic), did not think we should through away the principle just because we can't prove anything with it. He suggested renaming it "reduction" (and renaming deduction "abduction"). This would leave the word "induction" available to those special cases where we do have all the evidence. -- Don Steiny - Personetics @ (408) 425-0382 109 Torrey Pine Terr. Santa Cruz, Calif. 95060 ihnp4!pesnta -\ fortune!idsvax -> scc!steiny ucbvax!twg -/