Pragmatic Justification Essay -- Philosophy, Bertrand Russell

Bertrand Russell, one of the most influential philosophers of the modern age, argued extensively in his book, The hassles of Philosophy, that the belief in inductive reasoning is only quick-scented on the grounds of its intrinsic march it fuel non be justified by an appeal to experience alone (Russell 1998). Inductive reasoning refers to a bod of reasoning that constructs or assesses propositions that argon generalizations of observations (Russell 1998). Inductive reasoning is thus, in simplex terms, probabilistic. The premises of an inductive logical argument brook some spirit level of livelihood for the conclusion, but that support is in no way unequivocal or conclusive (Browne, 2004). notwithstanding even off if one agrees with Russell and concludes that there ar no rational justifications for the principle of induction in and of itself, one can still maintain that there is a pragmatic justification for maintaining a belief in the principle. Simply put, there are still utterly sound reasons for behaving as if the principle of induction holds true, regardless of whether or not the principle itself is rationally justifiable (Browne, 2004). This type of justification can be used across many of the belief systems that we as benevolent beings hold, even stretching to the playing field of religion. In this paper I go forth outline not only why it is pragmatically justifiable to deal in the principle of induction, but also why it is equally as justifiable to believe in an infinite graven image, regardless of whether or not deductive reasoning provides us with definitive support for such(prenominal) conclusions. lets begin by examining the issue of universal order and the Problem of Induction. The problem with inductive reasoning is that it is based on the assumption that ... .... Yet for our own happiness and peace of mind, we must believe that past occurrences, such as the insolate rising yesterday and the thousands of days before tha t, provide us with perfectly good evidence for believing that tomorrow the sun will rise again. By the same token, we can rationally support a belief in God, even if we cannot provide conclusive evidence for His existence (or non-existence). These types of pragmatic justifications are, I believe, essential to the happiness and well-being of human beings. Regardless of whether or not the arguments for the merit and existence of both God and the principle of induction hold any water whatsoever, the optimistic approaches to the problems are in no way harmful. They allow us to live our lives in relative happiness, regardless of the fact that we ultimately can be sure of so little in the universe we live in.