Lecture 3

Question 1

What are three main characteristics of ‘laws of nature’?

Answer 1

• Mathematical equations
• Concise and simple, often elegant
• Universal in scope

Question 2

What are laws in humanities and social sciences?

Answer 2

• Universally valid true statements that will never require revision
• Descriptions of regularities or other relations between entities or properties that hold irrespective of context or setting
• Represented in various formal models (Universal generalisations, conditional statements)

Question 3

What do these laws embody?

Answer 3

• The view that we can say significant things about human affairs without regard for cultural setting
• There is substantial universality or regularity underlying human affairs
• (determined in some cases biological, physiological, or logical constraints)

Question 4

What are two views of laws?

Answer 4

Regularity views of laws: description of what is the case

• Laws are true universal generalisations with special role in theorising
• They say no more than what is the case
• Induction

Necessity view of laws: what MUST be the case

• Laws are descriptions of necessary relations between entities or properties
• They say not just what is the case, but what MUST be the case
• Deduction

Question 5

What is induction?

Answer 5

• Good method for detecting regularities
• Goes from the particular to the general
• Less certainty, more informative

Observer notes regularity in few cases; then hypothesises that this holds for all cases

Question 6

What is deduction?

Answer 6

• Necessity views of laws
• Goes from general to particular
• More certainty, less informative

Question 7

What is the difference between induction and deduction?

Answer 7

Induction:

• X1 is an A and a B
• X2 is an A and a B
• X3 is an A and a B
• -> ranges over some but not all A’s
• Thus, all As are Bs

Deduction:

• All As are Bs
• A1 is an A
• Thus, X1 is a B

Question 8

Why does induction have a logical character?

Answer 8

• They go beyond observations performed (ampliative = reasoning that goes beyond premises)
• They are not logically compelling (inductive generalisation may be disconfirmed by the next case)
• That is why induction is productive and useful in research, but risky!

Question 9

What is Hume’s problem of induction?

Answer 9

• How can we justify the conclusion of an inductive reference?
• Only two ways to justify induction:
  1. through induction: but this runs into circularity
  2. through deduction: but this is too narrow to justify ampliative conclusions
• Thus, neither way of justifying induction is effective

Inductive generalisations cannot be justified logically; induction must be seen as a tendency of the human mind

Question 10

What is the pragmatic justification of induction?

Answer 10

• Proposed by scientists after Hume’s critique on induction
• We cannot be sure that the world contains any universal regularities
• But if it does, then induction is a good strategy to detect these regularities
• Because induction consists in noting any initial regularity, and hypothesizing it holds indefinitely
• Offers a pragmatic justification for using inductive strategy research