The problem of induction, identified by David Hume, questions how past observations can justify beliefs about the future. That the sun has risen every day doesn't logically guarantee it will rise tomorrow—past regularities could cease without contradiction. Scientists assume nature is uniform, but this assumption cannot be proven without circular reasoning. Most philosophers accept this unresolved challenge while noting that inductive reasoning remains practically indispensable.
It can be inferred from the text that
Hume solved the problem of induction
scientists have proven that nature must be uniform
inductive reasoning is never used in practice
some fundamental methods of inquiry may resist complete philosophical justification
Correct Answer: D
Choice D is the best answer. Induction is essential but philosophically unjustifiable.
- Context clues: Induction can't be proven non-circularly; yet it's "practically indispensable."
- Meaning: We rely on methods that can't be fully justified.
- Verify: Philosophers "accept this unresolved challenge"—the problem persists.
💡 Strategy: When a practice is essential but unjustifiable, infer limits on foundational justification.
Choice A is incorrect because Hume identified the problem—it remains "unresolved." Choice B is incorrect because the assumption "cannot be proven without circular reasoning." Choice C is incorrect because inductive reasoning is "practically indispensable."