Many philosophers, both Western and Eastern, agree that there are two major problems of induction. The first is the lack of certainty of conclusions drawn by means of induction that is inherent in inductive methods. The second is the extent to which we humans ignore the important issue of whether we are justified in believing something that is based only on inductively derived conclusions. This is art important issue both scientifically and socially. Any jury decision, for example, is arrived at by inductive means from evidence presented by prosecutors relying on police who arrested suspects based on their own use of inductive techniques. We sometimes make irrevocable decisions, for example, putting someone to death, based on inductive reasoning( and in at least 70 cases in the past decade, evidence not presented at the trial cleared people so sentenced: in some cases after they had been executed). Thus, in using induction as a method, many philosophers warn us to proceed with extreme caution.