Hume: something is necessary when we can't imagine it being false
-A triangle has 3 sides
-2+2=4

(1) We can imagine a cause w\o its usual
effect

cause-jumping out of a tall building
effect-plummet to death

(2) Therefore the effect isn't a necessary
result from it's cause

Problem of Induction
Inductive Reasoning-gather evidence and
come to probable conclusion
(vs. deduction where the conclusion
follows 100% from premisis)
ex: God is a perfect Being

Deductive-Existence is a perfection
=God exists logically deducting
things from other things
Inductive-every swan I've seen so far is
white--> all swans are white
* turns out it's false

**Any less than 100% certainty is mere guess work

Living life requires Induction-even if you don't believe in an external world
-in order to avoid pain

Dretske-relevant alternatives argument against skepticism

Zebra example:
even though we can't prove (don't need to/want to) they aren't cleverly disguised mules, we're entitled to believe they are zebras

*as long as other alternatives aren't plausable you're justified in your belief

Contemporary approach= go from common examples to conclusions about the nature of knowledge

The Burden of proof according to Dretske is on the skeptic to show particular reasons to doubt particular common sense beliefs

Common sense-innocent until proven guilty

How do you define a relevant or plausible alternative?
-majority belief
-should everyone count equally
-all cultures, all individual
-ability to create results make true predictions