The source of induction, speaking historically, is the general law
of what Dr J. B. Watson calls "learned reactions." In its schematic
simplicity, this law is as follows: If a stimulus to a living
body of an animal produces a reaction , and a stimulus
produces a reaction , then if and are applied
together, there is a tendency for alone, afterwards, to produce
as well as . E.g. if you expose a person frequently
to a certain loud noise and a bright light simultaneously, after a
while the loud noise alone will cause his pupils to contract. It is
obvious that the practice of induction is simply the application
of this law to cognitive reactions. If you have frequently heard the
words "there's Jones" when you could see Jones, these words will in the
end cause you to believe that Jones is present even if, for the moment,
you do not see him. This form of induction is involved in understanding
speech. It is obvious that, in its cruder forms, induction may give
rise to false beliefs as well as to true ones; scientific methodology
has to seek a form of induction which shall make false inferences
much rarer than true ones. If such a form can be found, a man may
train himself, in his professional activity, to abstain from the
more primitive forms. But as an ordinary mortal he could not survive
for a day if he refused to trust to what we may call physiological
induction, which stores up in the body the lessons of past experience.
In practice, a nearly instantaneous method of inference which is
right nine times out of ten is preferable to a slow method which is
always right. A man who subjected all his food to chemical[Pg 155] analysis
before eating it would avoid being poisoned, but would also fail to be
adequately nourished.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account