In the paper “A proof of the impossibility of inductive probability.” by Popper and Miller, they demonstrated that the truth of a theory cannot be supported by observation
Whereas its various rebuttals demonstrate the opposite.
Note that inductionism means different things in different contexts.
Whereas its various rebuttals demonstrate the opposite.
Note that inductionism means different things in different contexts.
I have not found any persuasive rebuttals of Popper’s argument. If you have found one that has convinced you, I am interested to know it.
Probablistic induction clearly works, since you can mechanise it (ie write simple code to perform it).
But you concern may well be with the other kind of induction, induction as a source of hypotheses.