**Links to**: [[Deduction]], [[Abduction]], [[Hume]], [[Habit]], [[Repetition]], [[Difference]], [[Bayesian epistemology]], [[Reason]], [[Rule]], [[Rule induction]], [[Rule-following paradox]], [[Grue-Bleen]], [[Foundations of Philosophy]], [[C. S. Peirce]], [[Bas van Fraasen]], [[Igor Douven]], [[Truth]], [[Concept]], [[Inference]], [[Thought]], [[Legitimacy]], [[Authority]], [[Dialogical]], [[Dialove]], [[Dialogue]], [[Private-public]], [[Social]], [[Rationality]], [[Sense]], [[Deduction]], [[Induction]], [[Abduction]], [[Semantic attractor]], [[Pattern]], [[Philosophy]], [[Intuition]], [[Cognition]], [[Logic]], [[Invention]], etc. There is no guarantee of total prediction, but induction would be the way it would be, if possible. All dominoes, all at once. **See also**: [[Abduction]], [[Deduction]]. %% Fred in [[Foundations of Philosophy]], module 2: "Induction and Hume’s Problem. Hume’s venerable problem of induction is that no matter how many times we see the sun rising at dawn, there is no guarantee that the sun will rise again tomorrow. This is why inductive reasoning is neither semantically valid (true premises do not guarantee a true conclusion) nor indefeasible (adding premises may turn the true conclusion into a false one). In broad terms, general knowledge cannot be extracted from particular experiences whilst particular experiences is all the senses can provide for us. Hume became an epistemic skeptic: somehow extracting knowledge from sense experiences is not possible, we believe things out of habit, and we must believe in order to act and to live. C.D. Broad, diligent pupil of Russell, called induction “the glory of science and the scandal of philosophy”." _______ ### Predictive processing "To arrive at predictions, brains require something on which these predictions can be based—predictive systems require _constraints_ on the set of prior probabilities and likelihoods that should be taken into account as they finalize and settle upon a set of predictions for any given sensory-neural situation (Friston, 2003; Kemp et al., 2007; Tenenbaum et al., 2011; Blokpoel et al., 2012; Clark, 2013; Hohwy, 2013). Without such constraints, it is impossible for any intelligent system to narrow down the possibilities enough to settle on a single hypothesis or set of hypotheses (Russell and Norvig, 2010; Tenenbaum et al., 2011; Blokpoel et al., 2012). Linguists and developmental psychologists tend to refer to these cognitive mechanisms as ‘‘constraints’’, while machine learning and artificial intelligence researchers tend to use the term ‘‘inductive biases’’ (Tenenbaum et al., 2011).". (p. 5, [[The Predictive Processing Paradigm Has Roots in Kant]]). [[05 Prediction]], [[Constraint]], [[Induction]]