Comments on: #114 Russell’s Turkey

By: Simon

Simon — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 13:13:53 +0000

I recognize that turkey to the left from the debate on climate change. It goes something like “oh, they said there would be catastrophes with the ozone layer and the Y2K problem and whatnot, but nothing happened, so nothing will happen this time either!”. Even if you accept the premises (which of course are silly as well; the ozone layer problem was solved because of CFC regulations), the conclusion is an inductive fallacy. The difference is that the turkey to the right in this comic doesn’t have much of an argument…

By: Problems with Probability « Dave Kinkead

Problems with Probability « Dave Kinkead — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 07:06:52 +0000

[...] when close to 1, which is precisely the domain where science is most interested. The story of Russell’s Turkey provides a vivid example of the ineffectiveness of frequency probability calculations, as even [...]

By: Vet vi hur morgondagen blir? « Nonicoclolasos

Vet vi hur morgondagen blir? « Nonicoclolasos — Fri, 15 May 2009 04:18:58 +0000

[...] ett exempel med kalkoner, att induktion har sina brister som metod för att förutsäga framtiden. Chaospet illustrerar [...]

By: Emil Kirkegaard

Emil Kirkegaard — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 21:44:05 +0000

Your definition of natural world is “wrong”, i.e. not what is normally meant.

By: Troconeitor

Troconeitor — Sun, 15 Feb 2009 20:18:39 +0000

It’s curious to see a brilliant mind like Russell’s came out with such a stupid example to refute inductivism. In the context of Hume argument, Inductivism is meant to be applied EXCLUSIVELY to the natural world, that is, the part of reallity NOT RELATED TO ANY KIND OF WILL!!! Living beings, be it humans or animals, as well as their relatioships, are subjected to PASSIONS, not LAWS!!!