Talk:Problem of induction

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Problem of induction article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3: 90 days

Philosophy: Epistemology / Logic / Science High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Epistemology
	Logic
	Philosophy of science

A summary of this article appears in Philosophy of science.

There is a draft for this page located at User:Dominic_Mayers_II/sandbox/problem_of_induction.

Keynes, edits to 'inductive reasoning' and 'grue'

I have recently made a few edits to inductive reasoning and reflected them here, mainly by including a reference to Keynes. It seems to me that these are relevant to the 'grue' problem but do not have a source for this.

My thinking is that one makes induction based on 'experience' so one would be led by induction to expect a continuation of experiencing emeralds as grue, rather than being committed to calling them grue. Doesn't this shift this 'problem of induction' to one of denotation?--Djmarsay (talk) 17:28, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]