Suri’s challenge regarding Hume

Prove that inductive reasoning works… that past observations that lead to the development of an heuristic.
This “works” because it results in useful outcomes, ie understanding the world in a manner that is most practical and effective. In this sense, inductive reasoning works.

… change the rules of ‘works’ to something that ‘works’ – challenge the alternative definition of ‘works’ as absolute truth, since absolute truth cannot exist. Instead, human beings generate “game truth”; truth that works within a given set of constraints and limitations. Thus, ‘truth’ should be defined as the most useful representation of the world around us.

Therefore, inductive reasoning works as it is the means that human beings use to draw sense of the world around us. To criticise induction on the basis that it does not actually demonstrate ‘absolute truth’ is absurd, since ‘absolute truth’ itself does not exist.