http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deductive_reasoning#Hume.27s_skepticism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deductive_reasoning#Hume.27s_sk... http://en.wikipedia.org/wik

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deductive_reasoning#Hume.27s_skepticism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deductive_reasoning#Hume.27s_sk... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductive_reasoning#Is_induction_reliable.3F http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductive_reasoning#Is_inductio... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_induction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_induction As mentioned, you have a great way of looking at it, but if the goal is strictly valid, sound, and dare I say, "clear" logic, your interpretation runs too close to "Hume's Skepticism," the "Problem of Induction." When we venture into the philosophical, my usual response is to eventually go running off into the weeds, screaming. ;) In asking the question, "Are all swans white?" can we infer the asker has seen a white swan? In asking the question, "Are all swans blue?" can we infer the asker has seen a blue swan? Though I'd prefer to leave race out of this (due to the "Chinese Mother" nonsense filling HN), replace 'swan' with 'people' and you'll see how the inferred premise can be false and can result in weak induction. Similar could be said for, "Does everyone want coffee?" With this said, it's really a philosophical debate at this point, so it's not a matter of one or the other of us being right or wrong, and I hear the field of weeds next to my house calling my name. ;) For what it's worth, your induction does seem reasonable. Lastly, I have enjoy both your submissions and your posts for quite a long time. They are consistently good.