# What must nature’s uniformity be like in order for scientific induction to be (non-deductively) valid?

## What is the principle of the uniformity of nature?

The uniformity of nature is the principle that the course of nature continues uniformly the same, e.g. if X is the cause Y, then Y will necessarily exist whenever X exists. In particular, the uniformities observed in the past will hold for the present and future as well.

## How many forms of uniformity of nature are there and what are they?

Ans:- There are two different forms of uniformity of nature. i) Uniformity of succession. ii) Uniformity of coexistence.

## What kind of proposition does scientific induction establish?

Ans:- Scientific induction is establishment of a general real proposition based on the observation of particular instances in reliance on the principle of uniformity of nature and the law of causation.

## Why is inductive reasoning not valid?

What Does Invalid Inductive Reasoning Look Like? If your premise is based on incorrect evidence, or if you simply use evidence incorrectly to support your premise, then the reasoning is invalid, even if the conclusion might be true!

## What is the principle of induction?

The principle of induction is a way of proving that P(n) is true for all integers n ≥ a. It works in two steps: (a) [Base case:] Prove that P(a) is true. (b) [Inductive step:] Assume that P(k) is true for some integer k ≥ a, and use this to prove that P(k + 1) is true.

## What does deductively valid mean?

An argument is deductively valid if, and only if, it’s not possible for it to be the case that both, 1) all of its premises are true and 2) it’s conclusion is false, as it were, at the same time. This will be our official definition of deductive validity.

## How do you know if an argument is deductively valid?

A deductive argument is said to be valid if and only if it takes a form that makes it impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion nevertheless to be false. Otherwise, a deductive argument is said to be invalid.

## Can inductive arguments be invalid?

Inductive arguments are not usually said to be “valid” or “invalid,” but according to the degree of support which the premises do provide for the conclusion, they may be said to be “strong” or “weak” over a spectrum of varying degrees of likelihood.

## What is an example of a deductively Invalid argument?

An example of an invalid argument is the following: “If it is raining, then the streets are wet. The streets are wet. Therefore, it is raining.” For convenience, we will represent this argument symbolically as [(p→q)∧p]→p.

## What makes an argument valid or invalid?

Valid: an argument is valid if and only if it is necessary that if all of the premises are true, then the conclusion is true; if all the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true; it is impossible that all the premises are true and the conclusion is false. Invalid: an argument that is not valid.

## Why is it that true premises do not make an argument deductively valid?

TRUE: A valid argument cannot have all true premises and a false conclusion. So if a valid argument does have a false conclusion, it cannot have all true premises. Thus at least one premise must be false.

## Can a deductively valid argument have a false conclusion?

A valid deductive argument can have all false premises and a false conclusion.

## What makes a strong and valid argument?

A valid argument is one in which it is impossible for the premises to be true while the conclusion is false. Thus, a strong argument gives us good reason to believe its conclusion. An argument is strong if you would expect the conclusion to be true based on how well-reasoned the argument is.