Hume's Induction Friendly Argument

873 Words4 Pages
Shelbi Fisher Philosophy 100 Paper 2 Hume’s Induction Argument Tomorrow we could wake up and discover that eating large amounts of fast food makes us healthier and thinner. The rule of simple induction would say that if we eat a lot of fast food we will not be healthy and we will be fatter, according to what we think now. But, simple induction for the example would say that fast food will cause weight loss and will make people thinner, therefore not being a hazard to our health. The world would also seem less induction friendly if one day the only acceptable form of currency became black pebbles. The rule of simple induction would tell us to conclude that since cash and coin has been acceptable to pay for whatever we need that the process of how we buy and sell things will continue to remain the same. For the example though, we would discover that dollar bills and the various coins we have will not buy us anything and the only way we can acquire goods or services is to present black pebbles to the store or service provider. For our world to cease to be induction friendly, the most common knowledge must appear false. If fast food suddenly made us thinner and our current currency was no longer viable, people would be upset because the world is not working in a way they are accustomed to. So much evidence, evidence that we would attribute to past experience, exists to prove that fast food indeed makes a person fatter and that cash can buy anything we want. Fast food companies could discover a new way of cooking or a new additive that didn’t affect the flavor of the product but produced great health benefits for the consumer. Everyone would flock to fast food restaurants without the fear of consuming too much fat or too many calories because of the reports that the food can induce weight loss and better health. Our government leaders could decide that

More about Hume's Induction Friendly Argument

Open Document