In this paper I will examine Helen Beebee’s argument that anti-Humeans are not in a better position to justify induction. I will first argue that her argument proves too much and that it can jeopardize the status of inference to the best explanation as a useful inductive principle. I will then propose a principle that should govern our use of disjunctive explanations in the context of inference to the best explanation and show that Beebee’s use of disjunctive explanations violates this principle.