A Study On John Norton’s Material Theory Of Induction

Inductive reasoning plays an important role in human cognition and scientific research.For a long time,although philosophers and scientists have tried to defend inductive reasoning,it is still challenged by the reasonableness of induction.The reason for this,according to Norton,is that all previous inductive theories hold that inductive reasoning should have a universal schema.According to Norton,it is this universal schema that hinders the solution of the problem of inductive rationality.Norton called the former inductive theory with universal schema formal inductive theory.After criticizing the former formal induction theory,Norton puts forward a substantive induction theory,which links the induction problem with the concrete practice of scientific research.Norton’s material induction theory provides a new way to solve the problem of induction.This paper first studies the debate between the formal theory of induction and the substantive theory of induction.By studying the debate between the formal theory and the material theory of induction in history,this paper clarifies the new development of Norton’s material induction in the empirical theory of induction.By contrast between formal induction theory and material induction theory,this paper illustrates one of the core points of material induction theory,that is,inductive inference is guaranteed by local facts rather than fixed schema.By using examples of formal inductive theory such as enumeration,analogical reasoning and Bayesian method,universal schema is rejected.Secondly,the thesis focuses on Norton’s essential induction.Norton calls the local facts that support the inference the " material postulate," which can be a generalization,a structural equation or a deterministic rule.It is summarized and developed with scientific experimental research.Norton also claims that "all generalizations are local",and he tries to generalize by using attributes of local facts to obtain new inferences,rather than the bayesian approach that limits the scope of logic but authorizes roughly across systems.Norton’s method of taking local facts as both premises and guarantees reduces the risk of generalization.Finally,this paper analyzes several typical objections of material induction theory and the responses to the refutations.There are three main types of criticism of material induction theory.The first is the problem of material retrogression,which extends from basic inductive skepticism,to which Norton offers a more convincing response.The second is the difficulty of internalism and externalism in revealing the essential assumption.Intrinsic difficulty is the contradiction between belief and material assumption,while external difficulty is based on the premise that material assumption is completely independent of belief and consciousness.Norton leans towards the externalist view on this issue,but he cannot resolve the contradiction between material assumptions and beliefs.The third type is that in the practical application,it is sometimes difficult to separate the material assumption from the schema in the formal theory.Nor does Norton offer a convincing response.In a word,Norton’s material induction theory solves the problem of reasonableness of induction to some extent,and makes people pay more attention to the scientific research and generalization of partial facts,which has certain positive significance.This theory,however,runs into new difficulties by placing too much emphasis on partial facts.