The problem of induction is a central concern for philosophers of science, since it is a widely-accepted concept that science uses inductive methods as its form of reasoning. I will show that one might solve the problem of induction by saying that science doesn’t use induction as its form of reasoning but rather falsifiability. To do this, I will first outline what the problem of induction is, followed by the argument that science doesn’t use induction. The problem of induction is that there is no correct inductive procedure or set of agreed upon rules that warrant a sound inductive argument. According to Hume, the problem of induction arises because no matter how many positive instances have been observed or co-joined in the past, there is no logical justification to assume that the same will occur in the future. For example, the inductive argument ‘Janice leaves for school at 7am, Janice is always on time therefore Janice will always be on time if she leaves at 7am’, contains a flaw since it is dependent on many factors (such as traffic or car accidents), that could result in this argument being false. In addition to this, a single person’s …show more content…
In science, once a theory has been stated, experiments are done to test the hypotheses. If one notices something which seems to falsify the hypothesis, it provides a way to improve, rework and better understand any problems present within the scientific theory. A theory can never be proven to be true but at least the process that we go through to corroborate theories and tentatively accept them is a rational process; and it only needs one instance to falsify it. Also, the inference from a falsifying instance to falsify a theory is purely deductive, and within a valid, sound deductive argument, the conclusion is guaranteed to be