A note on Charles Peirce's theory of induction

Journal of the History of Philosophy 5 (4):361-364 (1967)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:@ @ Notes and Dlscussaons A NOTE ON CHARLES PEIRCE'S THEORY OF INDUCTION By "Peirce's theory of induction," I refer to a system or collection of ideas which Peirce formulated about the nature and validity of inductive inference or inductive reasoning. This system or collection of ideas covers Peirce's writings from 1867 to 1905.1 During this period of his long philosophical career from 1857 to 1914, Peirce wrote his most important papers on the logic of science and probability. ~ These papers, though only a minor portion of Peirce's philosophical works, constitute a self-explanatory unit of study, simply because they deal with one single subject: the validity of synthetic inference. In the year 1867, Peirce wrote his paper "On the Natural Classification of Arguments," which provides a natural introduction to his treatment of inference and its validity in syllogistic terms and to his trichotomy of inference into deduction, induction, and hypothesis. Through the year 1877 to 1878, Peirce wrote a series of papers on "Illustrations of the Logic of Science." Beside the well-known "The Fixation of Belief" and "How to Make our Ideas Clear," there are four other important but comparatively little discussed papers which are essentially concerned with the logic of science and probability. They are in the following order: "Doctrine of Chances" (with corrections, 1893 and notes, 1910), "The Probability of Induction" (with corrections, 1893), "Deduction, Induction, and Hypothesis" (with corrections, 1893), and "The Order of Nature." In these papers, Peirce laid out his rationale for the validity of ampliative or synthetic inference and indicated a justification of induction in terms of probability. He also made explicit his conception of probabilty in terms of empirical frequency. But very often his ideas concerning the validity of synthetic inference appear disconnected and do not fit into a consistent, not to say wellorganized, whole. It was not until 1883 that Peirce wrote a comparatively systematic treatise on his general theory concerning the validity of ampliative or synthetic inference. This is his "A Theory of Probable inference," in which we find Peirce's statement of what a probable inference is and his argument that inductive inference is valid on account of its being a probable inference. After the year 1883, Peirce's philosophical writings appear to bear little upon his earlier problems in logic of science and probubility. But here and there we find a variety of topics under which Peirce touched the problem of justifying kinds of inference. One significant feature among these is Peirce's recurrent distinction between kinds of induction, a distinction which he had never made in his earlier writings. The distinction is between a "crude induction" (or "pooh-pooh" argument ), a "quantitative induction," and a "qualitative induction." This distinc1See the "Chronological Listing of Peirce's Papers Directly Bearing upon Induction and Probability" in the appendix. 2The earfiest of his papers which we have is dated 1857,and his philosophical activity continued until his death in 1914. [361] 362 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY tion is found in the following three short papers: "Three Kinds of Induction" (from "The Logic of Drawing History from Ancient Documents," 1901), "Kinds of Induction" (1903), and "The Varieties and Validity of Induction," (c. 1905). What Peiree calls a "crude induction" is an inference which concludes a universal generalization from what has been found in common in a group of instances. It is induction by simple enumeration. A quantitative induction is an inference from our knowledge of a statistical proportion of individual things having a certain character in a given sample to a conclusion regarding that in the population, from which the sample is chosen. ~ A qualitative induction, on the other hand, is a method of ascertaining factual truths by postulating hypotheses and confirming them on the basis of relevant evidences. That all these three forms of inference are considered induction by Peirce is due to the fact that they do not usually have the form of deduction, and they usually give rise to generalizations which are not deductively warranted by their premises. They differ, nevertheless, because they have different bases for generalizations and their generalizations have different contents. 4 In the light of Peirce's distinction between these three forms...

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

A Note on Feibleman's Interpretation of Peirce's Concept of Mathematics.Guy W. Stroh - 1985 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 21 (3):419 - 424.
Peirce on Probability and Induction.G. H. Merrill - 1975 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 11 (2):90 - 109.
Peirce's Early Account of Induction.John A. Jessup - 1974 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 10 (4):224 - 234.
Solution to the Problem of Induction: Peirce, Apel, and Goodman on the Grue Paradox.Jerold J. Abrams - 2002 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 38 (4):543 - 558.
A Note on James's Aid of Peirce.Frederick J. Down Scott - 1976 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 12 (1):71 - 76.
A Note on Peirce and Multiple Conclusion Logic.Chris Brink - 1982 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 18 (4):349 - 351.
Charles Peirce's Arguments for the Non-Probabilistic Validity of Induction.Chung-Ying Cheng - 1967 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 3 (1):24 - 39.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
21 (#715,461)

6 months
9 (#298,039)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references