Home – Home – Jornals – "Philosophy of Education" 2016 number 6

The article is devoted to the problem of induction; the problem is a topical one, as it has a multidisciplinary and philosophical value. However, some aspects of the problem are not presented in the well-known literature. For example, why science and philosophy hold opposite positions on the problem of induction? As is known, scientific community believes that the problem has already received specific solutions in some sciences. On the contrary, in philosophy starting with Hume, it is assumed that the problem has no reasonable solution. This work aims to explain the basis of different solution evaluation. We show that unequal positions are connected with different methods of obtaining results and different requirements to the credibility of results. For example, in Hume’s empirical philosophy, obtaining results concerning the human nature is based only on observation and Aristotelian syllogistics. However, mere observations are inadequate for obtaining new knowledge Aristotelian logic are indeed not enough for solving the problem of induction. Moreover, he underestimated the significance of probabilistic reasoning and rejected the heuristic character of geometry, because, according to Hume, the correctness of proofs depends on the quality of representation of the statement to be proven. The main idea of the work consists in the justification of the thesis that Hume’s skepticism is connected to high requirements to the quality, precision and reliability of results. That is why, Hume’s epistemology is still of some interest for the methodology of science and different areas of knowledge. In contrast to Hume, in modern science, the pragmatic requirements to probabilistic reasoning prevail. For example, in the probability theory and mathematical statistics, the Cournot principle is used. According to this principle, the low-probability event is not realizable in a single experiment [1]. Furthermore, in modern science and methodology of mathematical teaching, geometrical proofs are valued since many people possess geometric style of thinking.