Abstract

This chapter deals with the falsity of the sceptical conclusion. It is shown that the sceptical conclusion of Hume's argument is false. The currency of Hume's inductive scepticism is first considered. The nature of possible arguments against it is demonstrated. The chapter then addresses von Thun's argument against Hume's inductive scepticism. Von Thun's argument is a proof that inductive scepticism is false. Then, Hume having asserted some statements of logical probability, is not at liberty to reject the principles of logical probability. Consequently, the full _ad hominem_ effect of the von Thun argument is this: that, in the only sense in which statements of logical probability can be inconsistent, it shows that Hume's deductivism, regularity, and inductive fallibilism are inconsistent statements of logical probability.