You have seen thousands of sunrises. You expect another tomorrow. That expectation is induction, reasoning from specific observations to general conclusions. The sun has risen every day in recorded history, so it will rise again. The pattern is not guaranteed by logic. It is probable, not certain. David Hume pointed out that induction cannot be justified by reason alone. Any argument for induction would itself rely on induction, which makes the justification circular. The problem of induction remains one of the deepest puzzles in philosophy.

Induction is the backbone of science. Laws and theories are generalizations from observations. But science also uses deduction, abduction, and statistical inference. The hypothetico-deductive method combines all three: a hypothesis is proposed, predictions are deduced, and the predictions are tested against observations. If the predictions hold, the hypothesis is supported. If they fail, it is weakened. Induction is not the only form of scientific reasoning, but it is indispensable. Without it, we could not learn from experience.

Forms of induction

• Enumerative. Generalizing from a sample to a population.
• Analogical. Reasoning from similar cases.
• Causal. Inferring causes from correlations.
• Statistical. Drawing conclusions from probability data.

Induction is fallible. A conclusion can be probable and still be false. That is the price of learning from experience.