# Prediction is not Explanation The worst flaw of the [Inductivist](Induction.md) argument is the *non sequitur* that a generalized prediction / many observations is tantamount to a new theory. Did we first observe one universe, then a second, then a third, and then induce that there are trillions of them? Was the generalization that planets will 'wander' round the sky in one pattern rather than another, equivalent to the theory that planets are worlds, in orbit around the sun, and that our planet is one of them? It is also not true that repeating our observations is the way in which we become convinced of scientific theories. Theories are explanations, not merely predictions. If one does not accept a proposed explanation of a set of observations, making *more* observations is seldom the remedy. As always, the real way that theories are generated is via *conjecture* in ones mind. --- Date: 20241013 Links to: [Science Does Not Work Via Induction](Science%20Does%20Not%20Work%20Via%20Induction.md) [Fabric of Reality](Fabric%20of%20Reality.md) Tags: References: * []()