[lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- From: Donal McEvoy <donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 15:11:40 +0000 (GMT)
--- Eric Yost <eyost1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> How do weather forecasts fit into this project? Exit polls
> in elections?
Will come back to this (I hope). Meanwhile...
> Good examples of induction? For example,
>
> (a) Donal went to Manhattan and ate bagels at H&H Bagels.
> (b) Therefore there are bagels in Manhattan.
This is a valid deductive argument. It has nothing to do with induction.
Donal
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
- References:
- [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- From: Eric Yost
Other related posts:
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- » [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- [lit-ideas] Re: Back to Popper (and further back to Hume)
- From: Eric Yost