Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-03T16:39:21.786Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hume and the Fiery Furnace

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

Edward H. Madden
Edward H. Madden*
Affiliation:
State University of New York at Buffalo
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

There are a standard number of replies to the riddle of induction, none of which has gained ascendency. It seems that a new approach is needed that concedes less to the Humean dialectic. Humeans, both traditional and contemporary, unwittingly play on the ambiguity of the phrase “change in the course of nature,” and that is why 'C · ~E' appears to be self-consistent, though in fact it is not. I provide an analysis of 'cause' and ‘natural necessity’ which gives inductive inference that internal warrant we assume it to have in ordinary and scientific thinking and rebut in advance contemporary Humean objections based on the erroneous assumption that ‘x is necessary’ and ‘x is a priori‘ are materially equivalent.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 38 , Issue 1 , March 1971 , pp. 64 - 78
Copyright
Copyright © 1971 by The Philosophy of Science Association

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

REFERENCES

[1] Ayers, M. R., The Refutation of Determinism, Methuen, London, 1968.Google Scholar
[2] Cohen, L. J., “A Logic for Evidential Support,” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, vol. 17, 1966-1967, pp. 21–43, 105-126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3] Fisk, M., “Are There Necessary Connections in Nature?,” Philosophy of Science, vol. 37, 1970, pp. 385–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4] Hanson, N. R., “Hypotheses Fingo,” read at Newton Symposium, University of Western Ontario, April, 1967.Google Scholar
[5] Harré, R., “Particular and General,” in British Analytical Philosophy (eds. Williams, B. and Montefiore, A.), Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1966, pp. 109–129.Google Scholar
[6] Harré, R., “Powers and Qualities,” to appear in British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.Google Scholar
[7] Hume, D., Enquiries (ed. Selby-Bigge, L. A.), 2nd edit., O.U.P., 1936.Google Scholar
[8] Hume, D., Treatise of Human Nature (ed. Selby-Bigge, L. A.), O.U.P., 1949.Google Scholar
[9] Lamprecht, S. P., The Metaphysics of Naturalism, Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York, 1967, pp. 1–33, 112-145.Google Scholar
[10] Lamprecht, S. P., “Of a Curious Reluctance to Recognize Causal Efficacy,” The Philosophical Review, vol. 39, 1930, pp. 403–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[11] Madden, E. H., “A Third View of Causality,” The Review of Metaphysics, vol. 23, 1969, pp. 67–84.Google Scholar
[12] Madden, E. H., “Causality and the Notion of Necessity,” in Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 4, Reidel, Dordrecht, Holland, 1969, pp. 450–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13] Madden, E. H., “Definition and Reduction,” Philosophy of Science, vol. 28, 1961, particularly pp. 390–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14] Madden, E. H., “Ernest Nagel's The Structure of Science,” Philosophy of Science, vol. 30, 1963, pp. 64–70.Google Scholar
[15] Madden, E. H. and Kiteley, M., “Postulates and Meaning,” Philosophy of Science, vol. 29, 1962, pp. 66–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[16] Madden, E. H. and Hare, P. H., “On the Difficulty of Evading the Problem of Evil,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, vol. 28, 1967-1968, pp. 58–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[17] Madden, E. H., and Hare, P. H., “The Powers That Be,” to appear in Dialogue, Canadian Philosophical Review.Google Scholar
[18] Meyers, R. G., “Peirce on Cartesian Doubt,” Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, vol. 3, 1967, pp. 13–23.Google Scholar
[19] Salmon, W. C., “The Justification of Inductive Rules of Inference,” in The Problem of Inductive Logic, North-Holland Publ. Co., Amsterdam, 1968, pp. 24–43, 74-97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar