Induction and mere Empiricism are almost true. Because no one outside that philosopher's glass tower knows anything about inductive reasoning? This ignorance of induction and empiricism made me think about a new attitude to induction. Nobody in there knows B.Russel's chicken-like induction, does not know that the sunrise, nor the inductance of the laws of physics are inductive. That is why I think that induction should be brought to a better position and a proper relationship with the truth. It is inconceivable that this has not been done before? As if the secret society had deliberately wanted to continue this kind of proven nesting difference from ordinary people. The brief statement of philosophy of science for mere empiricism is that it is not enough for the philosophy of science. Nor do ordinary people know it, and where it leads? I've got to hear from a statistical economic that they teach that the empirical research which includes at least a thousand people is fully qualified research. So the university has learned to understand that empirical research with a particular mass is true. Unfortunately, the basics of the truth of any matter are not affected by how many people believe it to be the same, and mere empiricism is not enough for science philosophy. All observations based should always be classified as uncertain and inductive reasoning always unreliable. The inductively determined maximum is the right enlightened guess and not the truth. This tells everyone immediately that just the observation is the basis. The adjacent room's blue cushion is an enlightened guess that can be proved by several similar findings, guessings. The colour of the pillow is just a guesswork made with observations, never the truth. Thus separating truth and induction from one another would make people understand the uncertainties of induction and empiricism and immediately recognize their journey as an induction and as a maximum of enlightened guesswork and mere empiricism inadequate. All people should be aware of the lack of inductive reasoning and empiricism. The mere findings do not reach the truth ever? There is always a doubt about perception and generalization.