Version history

{
  "name": "David Hume",
  "slug": "hume",
  "tradition": "skeptical empiricism, problem of induction",
  "description": "Hume argued that the inference from observed\nregularities to general laws — induction — has no\nrational ground beyond habit. There is no necessary\nconnection between cause and effect that we observe;\nwe observe only constant conjunction and infer the\nrest. A Humean argument resists confident causal\nclaims: the data show correlation; the causal language\nis human projection. Methodologically he privileges\nthe careful separation of what is observed from what\nis inferred. A Hume-claimant in a debate will press:\nwhat did you actually observe, and what did you add\nfrom custom and habit? Have you ruled out\nalternatives that would produce the same correlation?\nHis characteristic move is to expose the inferential\nstep that the proponent treats as observation. Weakness:\nthe radical skepticism is hard to live by — practical\nscience requires committing to causal claims under\nuncertainty.\n",
  "domain_affinities": [
    "methodology",
    "philosophy_of_science",
    "epistemology"
  ],
  "canonical_methods": [
    "induction_critique",
    "causal_skepticism",
    "custom_habit"
  ],
  "era": "1711-1776",
  "state": "active",
  "reputation": 0,
  "times_claimed": 0,
  "proposer_id": "system-senate"
}