Chapter 1.2: Induction and background theories

For more videos on Philosophy by Victor Gijsbers go to:

[kemskorner]

Clarity of the lecture is impeccable. "Good Lecturers come from Dutch background, this lecturer comes from a Dutch background, therefore this lecturer is a good lecturer!

[yidanhan]

Sir, your lectures are so clear and interesting! Although my English is limited, I don’t have any difficulty in listening or understanding. Thank you very much!

[comforth]

This reminds me of a time when six teenagers were involved in a car accident in my area. They had gone to party at a nearby waterfall.

While on their way home, the driver (who was of them) lost control of the car and it rolled more than 3 three times. 3 of them died on the spot due to injuries. One was seriously injured. Another lost consciousness but later recovered. The last one was barely scratched.


When it came to explained what had caused the accident, 2 theories prevailed.

On one end there people (including my parents and close relatives) who believed the kids had angered the mermaids that resided at the waterfall by hosting their party near it. It is claimed that upon leaving the geographical feature, the kids were followed by a whirlwind which ultimately resulted in the accident. This i believe was based on the superstitious beliefs that these people held from childhood all the way into adulthood. This i believe was their background theory i.e When a waterfall, dam, natural spring, mountain, cave etc (geographic feature) is involved, catastrophic events that may occur will occur because of the influence of a supernatural entity.

There were reports after the accident that the car was speeding way above the speed limit. All the teens were drunk and the driver had a history reckless driving (on one occasion, he drove out of the road with 10 passengers in his cars).

This led me (and I believe other people as well) to conclude that wreck less driving was the cause of the accident. My background theory was, The operation of machinery or driving after the consumption of alcohol has been shown to be one of the leading causes of accidents.

[BellIain]

Been put onto these lectures by my son who is studying philosophy. I read all this stuff years ago, but these lectures are exceptional.

[masterofallhesurveys]

Once again, Victor your eloquence in explaining clearly and simply the content is wonderful. Two chapters in, now. I'm going to do them all. Thank you.

[ShuvamNayak]

This video series is treasure. YouTube should store them in nuclear safe backup servers

[maartenschumacher]

Trigger warning: hypothetical frog violence

[Aritul]

Thank you so much for these videos. The professor was so easy to understand. I wish he had done more videos on logic.

[kipling]

Fantastic! Best thing I’ve watched on inductive reasoning.

[dakhovid]

I just started joining college and our Professor had a bad fluent speaking where learning the lesson was easier than to understand his thanks for the great explanation it helps me so much understanding sir

[parshugyanram]

Nice lecture. Limited and measured words introduces subject smoothly.👍🏿

[bkciel]

So science is a biased theory? This is very mind blowing OMG.

[rogersyversen]

the problem is that some academics take this notion of the lack of neutrality to use the institution of the university as an arena for activism. one can still have an ideal, like the ideal of attaining truth. I know that truth about humans are problematic because of reflexivity, but this only means that the social sciences need to develop their thruths over time, hopefully with the help of artificial intelligence technology

[raoufzanati]

Sir, your explanation is amazingly clear. Thank you.

[prettyparadoxicalwoman]

I can't get enough of these philosophies, but what is this actually good for if I went to college in it? For so many years, I have studied things just out of interest and no actual productive results in my career life, so what is my probability that going into a college course for these things would be worth doing it for a career outcome? ty

[earthstick]

If an argument is inductive because it is tested over a subset of cases and relies on generalisation for the remaining cases, then does the argument become deductive if it is tested against all possible cases? Another way to ask that question is whether deduction can only be applied over a finite domain, and induction is required over an infinite domain.

[Hameedkhan-tirw]

Sir I impressed...good way of teaching method...thank you so much sir..

[OjoRojo]

You forgot time and how it fucks everything when it comes to induction. Thanks for the video!

[piyushashah]

Great Video, thanks. Can you please help with a citation that supports this idea that induction requires background theories? There seems to be a misconception that induction is about starting from a blank slate and am looking for a reference to refute that.

[Root.iiRise]

Thank you for your content! Extremely helpful!