The theme of inductive reasoning is both attractive and controversial，After more than 2,000 years，Philosophers have not reached a consensus on the standard mode of the summary law。Summary reasoning occupies a place in logic and scientific philosophy research，Mainly it is that it has a prominent advantage: it has philosophical reliability，Can be applied to complex cases in scientific practice。John Norton, an American scientist and logicist John Norton, proposed an inductive theory without universal mode，Refuse the induction system with universal rules in the past。Norton was the most interested in Einstein's scientific discovery theory，Gradually doubt after deep cultivation，How did Einstein discover these wonderful physics laws，and are confident that they are correct? This kind of intelligence is lingering in his heart，He gradually turns the focus of research to inductive reasoning。

　　bet365 Play online games

Norton combined with his scientific philosophical research background，It is pointed out that there are certain defects in the existing inductive reasoning mode。This drives him to propose a new induction logic theory: "The theory of essential induction"，"Pure In summary theory" with the principle of differences with universal induction "。In his opinion，The reliability of inductive reasoning comes from the facts of scientific practice，These facts are the "essence" of summary，Specific facts in each scientific field ensure that acceptable inductive reasoning in this field。

Humans have a unified standardized tendency，This tendency is manifested in all aspects。In the field of science，People expect to establish a unified all -thing theory。In the field of science methodology，We hope to get a standard reasoning bet365 Play online games mode that can apply various situations。Unfortunately，This tendency is just an ideal state。We failed to summarize the single systematic of induction and reasoning，This situation is by no means temporary，but the problem we will face for a long time。Why is there such a situation? Not because we lack the persistence pursuit of intelligence，Instead, the goals we set cannot achieve in principle。for a long time，Philosophers and logicists try to find a sufficient foundation for inductive reasonable。The most famous of which is the "Nature One Principles" proposed by Mier when explaining the five laws of the cause and effect。Russell, Kanes and others define the general principles of inductive generally defined in different ways。Various schemes are all diverse、Extremely out，Most of the solutions are drawn from deductible，Attempts to set a universal reasoning premise for inductive reasoning，but unsuccessful。This tricky problem reflects the irreconcilable contradictions between the principles of universality and the successful operation of science。On the one hand，If these principles are enough，and still the correct，Then these principles will become empty、Vague or even cycle。In fact，Except for a few special areas，The world we are in is not harmonious and consistent as a whole，Even with a certain degree of chaos。On the other hand，To explain the success of scientific practice activities，It is necessary to introduce some diverse specific facts，Then the principle of universality will be lost。

To overcome these difficulties，The theory of substantive induction can only be based on such a assumption: All inductives are local，The substantial assumption only obtains only in a specific field，inductive reasoning mode can only obtain local rationality。When we resort to the bureau's ministry plan，We no longer use general principles to do global defense for inductive reasoning，Instead of using substantial facts, local Bet365 app download defense，The gap between the principle of universal nature and the successful operation of science will automatically disappear。

　　The rise of the theory of substantive induction

Whether in the collision of philosophy，Or in scientific practice，Summary reasoning is an important issue that cannot be ignored。The previous induction focuses on the way to enter the form of induction，But in Norton's view，We are misleading by interpretation logic，Expectation to establish an inductive theory based on the universal mode，We inevitably entered the dead Hu Tong。Norton's opposite way，It has developed a set of induction theory that does not resort to general model。

Tracking the source，We found，In the historical development process of inductive logic，Logicists who have clearly discussed the substantive theory have two digits，The 19th -century British logicist Mill and Wenn。Grot refers to Mill's "Logic System" as "substantial logic"，Wen En inherited this statement。Mier proposed a induction system with essential rules，It can be described as an early attempt for substantially induced logic。Although Wenshen used this concept，But he does not fully agree with Mier’s position，Wenshen's "substantial logic" mainly introduces his frequency theory and its application。The idea of ​​the theory of substantive induction has sprouted，But Norton's first systematic elaboration of the core of the theory of substantive induction，Give it a new vitality。If the substantial induction theory of Mell and Wenshen is the traditional sense，So the theory of Norton's substantive induction is the modern context。A significant feature of the theory of substantial induction in modern context，reflected as the history of science、The relationship between scientific philosophy is closer。

2003，Norton published an article in the "Philosophy of Science" magazine "A Material Theory of Indust"，Formally proposed substantial induction theory。Norton is inspired by Gudman Bet365 app download and Hunpur，Combined with his scientific philosophy research background，Put forward a "substantial induction theory" that is different from "pure induction theory"，Emphasize local application of inductive，Refusing the universal induction and reasoning mode。We are often misleading by the model of the logic，Only ambitious model -based induction system will be built ambitiously。We must clearly recognize，​​Summary and reasonable obtaining legitimacy and reliability，The foundation of inductive reasoning is often based on facts in specific fields，Therefore, all inductive reasoning is local。

Because the inductive reasoning mode is determined by the facts，So we can examine the reliability of these facts to evaluate and control inductive risks。At the same time, the theory of substantive induction is no longer distinguished from the facts and mode parts of induction，Therefore, it is not easy to receive the problem of Hume's problem。The theory of substantive induction does not advocate any specific inductive reasoning system，Propagation of inductive reasoning can only be context or local，The theory of substantive induction is more like a framework "methodology of methodology"。

　　Basic concepts and core thoughts of substantive induction theory

The theory of substantive induction is relative to the theory of pure induction，What kind of induction theory can be called pure induction theory? The "pure" here does not specifically refers to the symbolic things similar to the logic，Instead, it refers to the general expression like interpretation logic，The acceptability of inductive reasoning is finally based on some general templates: we enter the actual content into these general templates，Then generate legal induction。Norton is called "Pure In summary theory"，The mainstream research currently inductive logic is purely induction theory，For example, Bayesic belongs to this category。For example，Probability Formula and Bayesian theorem with a template for Bayesian theory，and set the concept Bet365 app download of faith in this template。

Different from pure induction theory，The effectiveness of the purely induction theory is mainly based on formal effectiveness。The main idea of ​​the theory of substantial indispension is，The background facts obtained in a certain field Tell us，What are good inductive reasoning in this field，Which is bad inductive reasoning。This way of reasoning and almost all inductive reasoning methods mentioned in mainstream literature currently inductive literature are essentially different，The previous inductive reasoning methods were to distinguish between good inductive reasoning and bad inductive reasoning through inspection and reasoning。

We can then summarize the core ideas of the theory of substantial induction as two slogans，One is: "All inductive laws are local。"This slogan reminds us，In inductive reasoning，The laws of any natural sciences we found are limited to specific facts in certain specific fields。Another slogan is "No Words of Inductive reasoning"。This slogan reflects a core assumption: guarantee of inductive reasoning，The end did not go back to some common mode，Instead, it dates back to the logical facts that only obtained locally。

We cannot use the inductive reasoning mode listed in the current literature。Bayesism is not suitable for anywhere，But the problem is exactly here，At present, the mainstream view tends to believe that probability theory can be applied to almost all scientific fields。In the case of interpretation inference，The meaning of the symbolic word，We can quickly divide the good mode and bad mode。But this method is not suitable for inductive reasoning。On the contrary，The theory of substantive induction tells us，Some reasoning modes are good，It is because they depend on the specific facts in the application field，and these facts ensure these reasoning modes。

The development prospects of the theory of substantive induction

Norton's substantial induction theory is clear and concise，Turned out the limitations of summarizing the overall defense，It is believed that inductive bet365 Play online games reasoning is essentially local、Contextualization，The default mode of no mechanical matching and automatic application，Any overall defense will eventually fail。At this point，Most of the scholars agreed。Their doubts are mainly concentrated on two issues: first, the solution of the induction problem of substantial induction theory; the other is the standardized problem of the theory of substantial induction。

Leaving aside these small defects，We believe that the induction of the theory of the theory Local defense is profound。Fundamental perspective，The grand goal of purely induction theory cannot be achieved，Lack of effectiveness to apply。The theory of substantive induction only pursues the application potential and application effectiveness of the local field，Gathering the foothold，Avoid one -sided profound。Currently showing a diverse trend of Norton's substantial interpretation，For example, some scholars have proposed that they can use the theory of substantive induction to reason directly、Best Explanation Inference、Actival reasoning and ideological experiments on theoretical observation。As a localized context reasoning, it can be combined with case -based reasoning，It can also be confirmed by the ideological transformation theory of the theory of substantive induction。other，There are also scholars who use the theory of substantial induction as a scientific methodology，Apply it to social science。The theory of substantive induction is cutting -edge results in the field of inductive logic，It has attracted widespread attention in the logic academic and the scientific philosophy community。The theory of substantive induction as a unique local induction defense theory，To a certain extent, the strong vitality and broad development prospects of inductive logic。

　(This article is the major project of the National Social Science Fund "new development of modern induction logic、Research on the Frontier and Application of theory "(15ZDB018)、National Social Science Fund General Project "Research on Cognitive Signs of Soul Naturalization" (16bzx023)、Humanities and Social Sciences Research Funding Projects of the Ministry of Education The "Summary Logogical Frontier Research in Cognitive Psychology" (18yjc72040001) phased results)

(Author Unit: School of Philosophy of Nankai University)