Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T22:34:55.905Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Le problème dynamique de l’induction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 March 2010

Brian Hill
Brian Hill*
Affiliation:
HEC Paris et IHPST (CNRS)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

ABSTRACT: Since Goodman’s classic monograph (1954), it has been known that any reasonable theory of induction must involve non formal elements. However, the right to make theoretical use of such an element comes with responsibilities. This article argues for an apparently new desideratum for a theory of induction: namely, that it accounts for the dynamics of the non formal element used. None of the main existing theories of induction satisfies this desideratum. The recognition of the importance of dynamics does however have the advantage of suggesting where to look for a more acceptable and complete theory of induction.

RÉSUMÉ : Depuis l’ouvrage classique de Goodman (19954), on sait que toute théorie de l’induction doit comporter une composante non formelle. Or, la liberté théorique offerte par le recours à un tel élément implique des responsabilités. Cet article propose comme desideratum d’une théorie de l’induction qu’elle rende compte de la dynamique de sa composante non formelle. Ce desideratum, qui est nouveau, n’est pas satisfait par les principales théories existantes de l’induction. L’identification de l’importance de la dynamique a pourtant l’avantage de suggérer une voie vers une théorie plus acceptable et plus compléte de l’induction.

Type
Articles
Information
Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review / Revue canadienne de philosophie , Volume 48 , Issue 4 , December 2009 , pp. 701 - 715
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Philosophical Association 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Références bibliographiques

Carnap, R. 1945 «On Inductive Logic», Philosophy of Science, vol. 12, p. 72-97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitelson, B. 2008 «Goodmans ‘New Riddle’», Journal of Philosophical Logic, vol. 37, p. 613-643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glymour, C. 1980 Theory and Evidence, Princeton University Press, Princeton.Google Scholar
Goodman, N. 1946 «A Query on Confirmation», The Journal of Philosophy, vol. 43, p. 383-385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, N. 1954 Fact, Fiction and Forecast, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA).Google Scholar
Goodman, N. 1966 «Comments», The Journal of Philosophy, vol. 63, p. 338-351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hempel, C. G. 1943 «A Purely Syntactical Definition of Confirmation», Journal of Symbolic Logic, vol. 8, p. 122-143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howson, C. 2000 Hume’s Problem. Induction and the Justifi cation of Belief, Oxford University Press, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howson, C. and Urbach, P. 1993 Scientific Reasoning : The Bayesian Approach, Open Court, La Salle/Chicago.Google Scholar
Jeffrey, R. C. 1972 The Logic of Decision, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Nicod, J. 1924 Le problème logique de l’ induction, Alcan, Paris.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. 1971 A Theory of Justice, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA).CrossRefGoogle Scholar