Introduction In a recent article in BioEssays, John F. Allen uses Popper's philosophy of science to argue on p. 107 that ``There is no induction machine'', and that looking for one will result in ``waste of resources spent on the search itself.'' This argument is of great interest to me because I started my research life as a graduate student in philosophy of science in Popper's department at the London School of Economics in the years 1966±68. Popper had just published his book Conjectures and Refutations, 1963 in which he says on p. 53: ``Induction, i.e. inference based on many observations, is a myth. It is neither a psychological fact, nor a fact of ordinary life, nor one of scientific procedure.'' Indeed I remember Popper making the statement: ``induction is a myth'' in one of his lectures in 1967, to which he added: ``and those who claim that there is induction do not know what they are talking about.'' I need hardly add that I was completely convinced by Popper's very forceful arguments for this thesis which I believed for many years.
[1]
J F Allen,et al.
Bioinformatics and discovery: induction beckons again
,
2000,
BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology.
[2]
James F. Allen,et al.
In silico veritas
,
2001,
EMBO reports.
[3]
K. Popper,et al.
Conjectures and refutations;: The growth of scientific knowledge
,
1972
.
[4]
K. Popper.
Objective Knowledge: An Evolutionary Approach
,
1972
.
[5]
R. Swinburne.
OBJECTIVE KNOWLEDGE: AN EVOLUTIONARY APPROACH
,
1973
.
[6]
The incompatibility of Popper's philosophy of science with genetics and molecular biology
,
1999,
BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology.
[7]
Stephen Muggleton,et al.
Protein secondary structure prediction using logic-based machine learning
,
1992
.