Hostname: page-component-6bb9c88b65-s7dlb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-19T23:39:13.880Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genericity and Inductive Inference

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2022

Henry Ian Schiller
Henry Ian Schiller*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom
*
Email: h.i.schiller@sheffield.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We are often justified in acting on the basis of evidential confirmation. I argue that this is because inductive inference supports belief in non-quantificational—or generic—generalizations, rather than universally quantified generalizations. I show how this account supports, rather than undermines, a Bayesian account of inductive inference. Induction from confirming instances of a generalization to belief in the corresponding generic is part of a reasoning instinct that is typically (but not always) correct, and allows us to approximate the predictions that formal epistemology would make.

Information

Type
Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 90 , Issue 3 , July 2023 , pp. 539 - 557
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bacon, Andrew. 2020. “Inductive Knowledge.” Noûs 54 (2):354–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baron, Jonathan. 2007. Thinking and Deciding. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Carlson, Greg N. 1982. “Generic Terms and Generic Sentences.” Journal of Philosophical Logic 11 (2):145–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cimpian, Andrei, Brandone, Amanda, and Gelman, Susan A.. 2010. “Generic Statements Require Little Evidence for Acceptance but Have Powerful Implications.” Cognitive Science 34 (8):1452–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Claveau, François, and Girard, Jordan. 2019. “Generic Generalizations in Science: A Bridge to Everyday Language.” Erkenntnis 84 (4):839–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, Donald. 1967. “The Logical Form of Action Sentences.” In The Logic of Decision and Action, edited by Rescher, Nicholas, 81–95. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fantl, Jeremy, and McGrath, Matthew. 2002. “Evidence, Pragmatics, and Justification.” Philosophical Review 111 (1):67–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fantl, Jeremy, and McGrath, Matthew. 2009. Knowledge in an Uncertain World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gigerenzer, Gerd, Todd, Peter, and ABC Research Group. 2000. Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Haslanger, Sally. 2011. “Ideology, Generics, and Common Ground.” In Feminist Metaphysics, edited by Witt, Charlotte, 179–207. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawthorne, John, and Stanley, Jason. 2008. “Knowledge and Action.” Journal of Philosophy 105 (10):571–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hume, David. 1748/1993. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. Cambridge, MA: Hackett Classics.Google Scholar
Johnston, Mark, and Leslie, Sarah-Jane. 2012. “Concepts, Analysis, Generics, and the Canberra Plan.” Philosophical Perspectives 26 (1):113–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, Daniel, and Tversky, Amos. 1979. “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk.” Econometrica 47 (2):263–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kipper, Jens. 2018. “Acting on True Belief.” Philosophical Studies 175 (9):2221–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lange, Marc. 2008. “Hume and the Problem of Induction.” In Handbook of the History of Logic, Volume 10: Inductive Logic, edited by Gabbay, Dov, Hartmann, Stephan, and Woods, John, 43–92. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Leslie, Sarah-Jane. 2007a. “Generics and the Structure of the Mind.” Philosophical Perspectives 21 (1):375–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leslie, Sarah-Jane. 2007b. “Generics, Cognition and Comprehension.” Ph.D. thesis, Princeton University.Google Scholar
Leslie, Sarah-Jane. 2008. “Generics: Cognition and Acquisition.” Philosophical Review 117 (1):1–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leslie, Sarah-Jane. 2012. “Generics.” In Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Language, edited by Russell, Gillian and Fara, Delia, 355–66. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Leslie, Sarah-Jane. 2015. “Generics Oversimplified.” Noûs 49 (1):28–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leslie, Sarah-Jane. 2017. “The Original Sin of Cognition: Fear, Prejudice, and Generalization.” Journal of Philosophy 114 (8):393–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leslie, Sarah-Jane, and Gelman, Susan A.. 2012. “Quantified Statements Are Recalled as Generics: Evidence from Preschool Children and Adults.” Cognitive Psychology 64 (3):186–214.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liebesman, David. 2011. “Simple Generics.” Noûs 45 (3):409–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liebesman, David, and Sterken, Rachel Katharine. 2021. “Generics and the Metaphysics of Kinds.” Philosophy Compass 16 (7):e12754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Llewelyn, John E. 1962. “Unquantified Inductive Generalizations.” Analysis 22 (6):134–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mercier, Hugo, and Sperber, Dan. 2018. The Enigma of Reason. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Nelson, John O. 1962. “Are Inductive Generalizations Quantifiable?” Analysis 22 (3):59–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nickel, Bernhard. 2016. Between Logic and the World: An Integrated Theory of Generics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Popper, Karl R. 1959. “The Propensity Interpretation of Probability.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 10 (37):25–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rhodes, Marjorie. 2020. The Development of Social Essentialism. Cambridge, MA: Academic Press.Google ScholarPubMed
Rhodes, Marjorie, Leslie, Sarah-Jane, Bianchi, Lydia, and Chalik, Lisa. 2018. “The Role of Generic Language in the Early Development of Social Categorization.” Child Development 89 (1):148–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silva, Paul. 2020. “A Bayesian Explanation of the Irrationality of Sexist and Racist Beliefs Involving Generic Content.” Synthese 197 (6):2465–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorensen, Roy. 2012. “The Sorites and the Generic Overgeneralization Effect.” Analysis 72 (3):444–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sterken, Rachel Katharine. 2015a. “Leslie on Generics.” Philosophical Studies 172 (9):2493–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sterken, Rachel Katharine. 2017. “The Meaning of Generics.” Philosophy Compass 12 (8):e12431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sterken, Rachel Katherine. 2015b. “Generics in Context.” Philosophers’ Imprint 15 (21):1–30.Google Scholar
Teichman, Matt. 2016. “The Sophisticated Kind Theory.” Inquiry 2016:1–47.Google Scholar
Thakral, Ravi. 2018. “Generics and Weak Necessity.” Inquiry 2018:1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Michael. 2008. Life and Action: Elementary Structures of Practice and Practical Thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Cleve, James. 1984. “Reliability, Justification, and the Problem of Induction.” Midwest Studies in Philosophy 9 (1):555–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisberg, Jonathan. 2013. “Knowledge in Action.” Philosophers’ Imprint 13 (22):1–23.Google Scholar
Williamson, Timothy. 2000. Knowledge and Its Limits. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar