Popper's Response To The Problem Of Induction

The problem of induction is that individuals tend to believe that repeated observational success is equivalent to knowledge when, in reality, induction is not a logically sound form of reasoning. Induction, taking past observations and applying them to create theories or laws that dictate future experiences, implies that one can “know” things one has not yet experienced. There does not exist a justification that the future will resemble the past. Therefore, even if one has only ever seen swans that are white in color, that does not entail that all swans are white or that the next swan one sees will be white. One does not know that all swans are white unless they have physically seen each and every swan that exists and the swans have all been

To summarize, a counter instance, such as finding a black swan, can disprove the theory that all swans are white, but finding a white swan can in no way prove that all swans are white. By this logic, all of our universal laws and theories cannot be characterized as knowledge and will forever remain guesses, hypotheses, or conjectures. Although Popper rejects induction, he believes individuals aren’t prevented from preferring certain theories over others. For instance, although one does not know for sure that the Earth revolves around the Sun, one may prefer that theory over others (such as the Sun revolving around the Earth instead) because the other theories have either been falsified or have less evidence supporting them. In order to falsify a theory, which is proving it false, it only takes one counter instance. Popper’s view holds that a theory can never be confirmed; therefore, the best alternative is to use falsificationism in order to prove certain theories incorrect, consequently narrowing down the options, and then choosing the best theory to explain some phenomena. One’s preferred theory is a tentative acceptance of the hypothesis; it still is not and cannot be classified as knowledge. Another one of Popper’s points regarding induction and falsification claims that if something cannot be falsified, then it cannot be deemed as a science. If a theory can be made to be unfalsifiable, then the theory is pseudo-science. An example of a theory that is not refutable would be Sigmund Freud’s psycho analysis since there is no way to falsify his claims. Popper then goes on to explain the pragmatic problems of induction, “Upon which theory should we rely for practical action, from a rational point of view?” and