Difference between revisions of "Induction"

From MgmtWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Solutions)
(Solutions)
 
Line 11: Line 11:
 
==Solutions==
 
==Solutions==
 
* Human civilization would not survive without [[Induction]] for that is the method that allows us to learn from experience and avoid repeating mistakes from the past. Without it we would could not find food or avoid becoming food.
 
* Human civilization would not survive without [[Induction]] for that is the method that allows us to learn from experience and avoid repeating mistakes from the past. Without it we would could not find food or avoid becoming food.
* It is widely believed that the civilization of humankind evolved as human's evolved the ability to create systematic planning methods.<ref>Christine Kenneally, ''Systematizers'', New York Time Book Review (2020-12-20) p9.</ref>
+
* It is widely believed that the civilization of humankind evolved as human's evolved the ability to create systematic planning methods.<ref>Christine Kenneally, ''Systematizers'', New York Time Book Review (2020-12-20) p9.</ref> It is less clear when this change in our genetics occurred, or if it could be traced to a single big change. Best current sense it happened between 35,000 to 70,000 years ago, as that the is period that civilizations developed.
  
 
==References==
 
==References==

Latest revision as of 11:23, 20 December 2020

Mime

Induction is the process that leads us to the conclusions we need to stay alive and functioning in the creation of Models of the Ecosystem where were live.

Context

Deduction is inference deriving logical conclusions from premises known or assumed to be true, with the laws of valid inference being studied in logic. Induction is inference from particular premises to a universal conclusion. ... Statistical inference uses mathematics to draw conclusions in the presence of uncertainty.

Problems

  • Induction is roundly criticized as unprovable since the time of David Hume[1] in the West. If we look back to Rome we find the doubt beginning with Sextus Empiricus ( c. 160 – c. 210 AD)[2]
    It is also easy, I consider, to set aside the method of induction. For, when they propose to establish the universal from the particulars by means of induction, they will effect this by a review either of all or of some of the particular instances. But if they review some, the induction will be insecure, since some of the particulars omitted in the induction may contravene the universal; while if they are to review all, they will be toiling at the impossible, since the particulars are infinite and indefinite. Thus on both grounds, as I think, the consequence is that induction is invalidated.
  • If I use Induction as just an expansion from the particular to the general, I find that after reading many obituaries, that not one is about me. Therefore there will never be an obituary about me.
  • From the point of view of anyone studying Complexity or trying to build Resilience into a system, if the unexpected event is not factored into the system design, the likelihood of failure from extreme events is essentially certain.

Solutions

  • Human civilization would not survive without Induction for that is the method that allows us to learn from experience and avoid repeating mistakes from the past. Without it we would could not find food or avoid becoming food.
  • It is widely believed that the civilization of humankind evolved as human's evolved the ability to create systematic planning methods.[3] It is less clear when this change in our genetics occurred, or if it could be traced to a single big change. Best current sense it happened between 35,000 to 70,000 years ago, as that the is period that civilizations developed.

References

  1. David Hume. A Treatise of Human Nature (1739) Book 1, part iii, section 6
  2. Sextus Empiricus. Outlines of Pyrrhonism Book II, Chapter 15 Section 204 trans. Robert Gregg Bury (Loeb ed.) W. Heinemann (1933), p. 283.
  3. Christine Kenneally, Systematizers, New York Time Book Review (2020-12-20) p9.