An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding¶
Hume, D. (1748). An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. The Logic of Scientific Discovery.
Cited by¶
3 citations across 3 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Black Swan (High-Impact, Low-Probability Events)
- The term "black swan" in its modern sense was popularized by Nassim Nicholas Taleb in Fooled by Randomness (2001) and especially The Black Swan (2007), drawing on the philosophical usage of "black swan" as an example of the problem of induction (Hume via Popper and others
This sourceThe black swan is the classic counterexample to universal induction (no number of observed white swans establishes 'all swans are white'); Popper builds falsificationism on it. Cited inline in Broad Use.
- The term "black swan" in its modern sense was popularized by Nassim Nicholas Taleb in Fooled by Randomness (2001) and especially The Black Swan (2007), drawing on the philosophical usage of "black swan" as an example of the problem of induction (Hume via Popper and others
- Causality
- Causality is.
Supported in partVerified against the work's full text
Hume defines cause via antecedent object, consequent object, constant conjunction and a counterfactual, but explicitly denies we have an idea of a productive connection.
“we may define a cause to be an object, followed by another, and where all the objects similar to the first are followed by objects similar to the second”
- Causality is.
- Uniformitarianism
- The structure is: (a) observe some present process, measure its rate or mechanism; (b) assume the same process operated in the past at (methodologically) the same mechanism; © infer past states that would have produced the observed present record under that assumption — a structure that exemplifies the inductive inference Hume (1748) identified as foundational to (and unprovable by) empirical reasoning.
This sourceFoundational for the philosophical status of uniformitarianism as an inductive (and therefore non-demonstrable) assumption.
SupportedVerified against the work's full text
Hume argues every inference from experience presupposes that the unobserved resembles the observed, a supposition no experiential argument can prove.
“For all inferences from experience suppose, as their foundation, that the future will resemble the past, and that similar powers will be conjoined with similar sensible qualities. If there be any suspicion that the course of nature may change, and that the past may be no rule for the future, all experience becomes useless, and can give rise to no inference or conclusion. It is impossible, therefore, that any …”
- The structure is: (a) observe some present process, measure its rate or mechanism; (b) assume the same process operated in the past at (methodologically) the same mechanism; © infer past states that would have produced the observed present record under that assumption — a structure that exemplifies the inductive inference Hume (1748) identified as foundational to (and unprovable by) empirical reasoning.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 2 of 3 citations: 1 supported, 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Links previously used in the corpus¶
Before the registry existed this work was also linked 1 other way.
Registry ID ref:00ad23917d78 · see in the full table