Class Notes (807,239)
Canada (492,664)
Philosophy (915)
PHLA10H3 (172)

Week 10 notes

3 Pages
Unlock Document

University of Toronto Scarborough
William Seager

Philosophy Week 10 Notes Is PUN a priori? - can we give a deductive proof of PUN? - Is it possible that nature should not be uniform - It seems possible, therefore, PUN sis not a priori Therefore, PUN is a Posteriori - so it must be proven either by observation or induction - we cannot observe PUN because it is about the future - so we must give an inductive argument for PUN Therefore, the argument will contain an assumption - the assumption according to HUME will be PUN - although this is circular reasoning and cannot show PUN Ex. Argument: - in the past, PUN has always been true - therefore, inductively, PUN is true Hume notes that this argument depends on the assumption that nature will continue to obey PUN The argument ought to be: - in the past, PUN has always been true - PUN - Therefore, PUN is true This argument fails because it blatantly assumes what it wants to prove Humes attitude towards induction - Hume thought we should reason inductively even though we have no rational reason to do so - He thought we (and many other animals) are naturally structured to believe in and use induction - Ex. Pavlovs dogs - Hume sometimes called this habit - He also noticed instincts which are built in by nature and carry info
More Less

Related notes for PHLA10H3

Log In


Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.