Onthe other hand, oftentimes, certain pre-determined consequences result in anopposing outcome. This contradiction often occurs due to ergonomic factors. Forinstance, foreign aid should be given as a moral duty independent of itsconsequences, and is expected to yield beneficial results.

Aid is driven by theemotional sense of universal empathy and was coined by Jagdish Bhagwati as”cosmopolitan altruism” – the emotional desire to assist endangered or needystrangers.1 Although,Jagdish argues that international aid does not alleviate poverty and creates”perverse incentives and unintended consequences”.2 In theCentral African Republic, Emperor Bokassa used western aid to buy a gold platedbed, and Mobutu Sese Seko, dictator of the Democratic of Congo, spent foreignfunds on personal excursions on the Concorde. Thus, these discrepancies betweenintentions and realities continue to impact humanitarian efforts. Because suchscandals of greed detract from man’s emotional desire to help, assuming foreignaid alleviates poverty is naïve. Thus, as long as human behavior remainsunforeseeable, our knowledge of the rules that govern the solution to worldpoverty becomes flawed.

 According to Hume’s principleof uniformity of nature, “inductive inferences make the assumption thatunobserved cases will resemble previously observed cases”3.Our belief in this principle can be founded on reasoning, in particularempirical reasoning. Through empirical reasoning, we use our sense perceptionand observations of patterns to infer the existence of others and draw conclusions.  For instance: “whenever there is a typhoon inthe Philippines, classes are cancelled, therefore during the next typhoon school will be closed”. A classic example ofinductive reasoning in science is Émile Durkheim’s study of suicide.

Durkheim createda sociological theory of suicide, based on his study of suicide rates amongCatholics and Protestants.4He found that suicide was more common in Protestants than Catholics and createda general theory of how suicide rates fluctuate with changes in socialstructure.5Thus, inductive reasoning begins with generalizations; information aboutpatterns that were derived from past observations and formed into overarchingconcepts. It attempts to construct propositions into realms where no direct informationis available.1 Galston,W.

(1993). Cosmopolitan Altruism. SocialPhilosophy and Policy, 10(1), 118-134. Doi: 10.1017/S02650525000040402 Bhagwati, J. (2010).

 WhyInternational Assistance Does Not Alleviate Poverty. online Global PolicyForum. Available at: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/social-philosophy-and-policy/article/cosmopolitan-altruism/D810D8E06CDBC6A43A7B9FC024B3C1ADAccessed 30 Dec. 2017. 3 Ariew, R. and Watkins, E.

(2009). Modern Philosophy. An anthology of PrimarySources.

2nd ed. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Inc. pg. 5-64 Cole, N.

(2013). Deductive vs Inductive Reasoning – What’sthe Difference? ThoughtCo. Available at: https://thoughtco.com/deductive-vs-inductive-reasoning-3026549 Accessed 1 Jan 20185 Cole, N. (2013). Deductive vs Inductive Reasoning – What’sthe Difference? ThoughtCo.

Available at: https://thoughtco.com/deductive-vs-inductive-reasoning-3026549 Accessed 1 Jan 2018