BonJour's a priori justification of induction

Laurence BonJour has recently attempted to formulate an a priori justificat ion of induction (in In Defense of Pure reason). He maintains that we can k now a priori that the truth of an inductive inference's conclusion constitu tes the best explanation of the inference's inductive premise. Though BonJo ur's discussion raises a host of interesting issues, I think that his defen se of induction rests upon a number of controversial assumptions.