Abstract
According to Hume, the paradigm type of inductive reasoning involves a constant conjunction. But, as Price points out, Hume misrepresents ordinary induction: we experience very few constant conjunctions. In this paper, I examine several ways of defending Hume's (psychological) account of our practice against Price's objection, and conclude that the theory cannot be upheld.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 169-187 |
Number of pages | 19 |
Journal | Hume Studies |
Volume | 34 |
Issue number | 2 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Nov 2008 |