Inductive reasoning doesn’t lead to any results, ever.
No one has ever used it.
This is so empirically false that I don’t know how to approach it. Do you actually think that when people are saying that they are using induction they really aren’t? Note that this isn’t the same claim that people shouldn’t be using induction or that their induction is unjustified. But claiming they are not using it is just wrong unless you are using some very non-standard terminology under which one could say things like “No one has ever used homeopathy.” This seems like an abuse of language.
This is so empirically false that I don’t know how to approach it. Do you actually think that when people are saying that they are using induction they really aren’t? Note that this isn’t the same claim that people shouldn’t be using induction or that their induction is unjustified. But claiming they are not using it is just wrong unless you are using some very non-standard terminology under which one could say things like “No one has ever used homeopathy.” This seems like an abuse of language.
Post the method of induction, step by step, in sufficient detail that a reasonable person could do it without having to ask any questions.
When you fail—in particular by having large unspecified parts—it will be because you are wrong about the issue in question.
When you respond to this failure by making ad hoc additions that still don’t provide followable instructions, then I will stop talking to you.
OK, go ahead.
Please reread my statement. The issue I was arguing with is not whether or not induction is justified. It was whether or not people are using it.