ABSTRACT
David Hume's challenge to justify inductive conclusions is a demand for some sort of deductive rationale underlying such conclusions. This Humean conception of the matter is very much the same as the radical proposal of recent years, though the latter shifts from psychological to linguistic terminology. This chapter outlines some of the critical developments and some leading question underlying these developments by reference to the generalization formula. According to the modern version, predictions are made in conformity with general theories that have worked in the past. There is no implication that past success guarantees future success, but only the suggestion that the past success of theories provides a criterion for singling out those predictions regarded as justified at any given time. Inductive reasoning is conceived as reflecting the mind's development of a habit, connecting the expectation of one quality with the occurrence of another, following frequent conjunction of the two qualities in past experience.
