The idea of Determinism is explored by many philosophers in the construction of arguments against free-will, morality, and liberty. Determinism is a philosophy that claims that all things are causally related to each other and there is a necessity behind every event that occurs and while Determinism as a term wasn’t coined as a term until the 19th century, David Hume explored these major concepts in his Enquiry, delving into the roots of humanity and questioning the truth of human freedom.1 In particular his exploration into human understanding leads him to conclude that there is no effect without a cause and liberty when opposed to necessity cannot universally exist.2 Hume’s discovery, the Causal Maxim, and is generally accepted among philosophers, though it is not enough in and of itself to prove that he fits the mold of a determinist. However, by delving further into his various arguments, I will prove that Hume’s philosophy, mainly the denial of induction and support of causation, follows the discreet specifications of Determinism.

Essential to the understanding of Hume’s philosophy is his idea of the universal necessity of connection between cause and effect, though he aptly admits that this connection is unobservable and denies that humans can ever have a true understanding of cause and effect.3 To explain such a broad claim Hume addresses a situation in which causality could prove troublesome by illustrating that God, through an immense causality chain, could be the true author of crime and immorality. This approach at explaining the connection between human criminality and God is deterministic, though Hume quickly halts this explication by admitting that it is outside of the bounds of human reason to understand the will of God.4 Regardless of the incompletion of what would likely turn to the metaphysical side of philosophy, Hume readily admits that it is possible for this causal chain to exist which directly contradicts what humans consider liberty.5 The other possible situation, which Hume clearly denies, follows the same causal chain but is the product of a dissimilar argument: God is imperfect.6 Hume argues that we cannot know this chain of events, and speculation on this subject leads us to ignore the world around us, which is the sole provider of knowledge. This ignorance of a world outside of the bounds of human experience does not allow us to understand the nature of God, making a discussion of his perfection outside of the bounds of reasonable philosophy. Determinism is the root of Hume’s method of discovery, and though it is clear that he is not willing to admit that God created human sin or is imperfect, Hume clearly acknowledges that such arguments have merit, though the answers lie outside of the subjective nature of empirical impressions.

One of the most influential human concepts is the idea of freedom with respect to individual and cultural identity.7 Hume, contrary to these overwhelmingly universal beliefs, claims that there is remarkable uniformity in human actions. He cites the predictability of the consequences of various human emotions relative to the motive, as with ambition leading to conquest or generosity leading to charity.8 Therefore, human action can be equally predicted by cause and effect, and it is absolutely necessary for a relatively stable society to exist. Hume argues that through observation we predict human behavior, and it is universally acknowledged that humans participate in this activity in contradiction to our belief that humans have the capacity to act freely.9 Hume speculates that morality may not be possible if this liberty does not exist because humans, under the will of an external force, could not accurately be blamed for their action because they are not the cause of them.10 However, an action can be performed causally within the bounds of a moral concept such as justice because, regardless of what force determined some form of injustice, there is an underlying feeling of wrongdoing that must resonate within the person who was causally determined to commit the act. Hume utilizes cause and effect to explain how human morality can exist through the constant effort of predicting certain consequences for various actions and emotions, further affirming his deterministic approach at philosophy.

Humans derive necessity of various magnitudes from everyday experience which have conditioned us to accept certain phenomenon as true in and of themselves. It would be a difficult task to argue a physicist that the Sun will not rise tomorrow, given the data and consistent observation from the beginning of history that the sun has always risen. Yet, it is only through observation that we have determined that the sun will rise, the necessity does not exist in anything but the cause and effect of rising. Hume argues that causal necessity of things occurring in the world can be attributed to the consistent impressions that we receive from the world.11 These impressions, while endearing and seemingly fruitful, do not provide us with solid foundation for which we can say that worldly things must occur, yet they are the baseline for which we attempt to predict our natural world. We look at something that has happened, the effect, and predict the predecessor, the cause. It is through the process of induction that we extrapolate that, because the Sun has risen every day in the history of humans, it must rise tomorrow, yet this reasoning can only give us a high probability of certainty and nothing more.12 It is the unfortunate that the nature of cause and effect, with a necessary connection between, cannot be discovered by any empirical or logical proof, yet is absolutely necessary. Hume’s version of cause and effect, though much softer than that of other philosophers, falls within the bounds of determinism, and may be stronger than the reasoning of other philosophers because he does not to attempt to make claims outside of the bounds of reason to explain this necessary connection that is the root of his philosophy.

Notes 1. Greenstreet, Stuart. "Kant versus Hume on the Necessary Connection." Phisolophy Now, January 2005. 2. Hume, David. An enquiry concerning human understanding. Raleigh, N.C.: Alex Catalogue, 199, 49. 3. Klaudat, André. Hume, liberty and the object of moral evaluation. Kriterion [online]. 2003, vol.44, n.108 [cited 2012-11-06], pp. 191-208 . Available from: .
4. Hume, Enquiry, 52 5. Ibid., 52 6. Ibid., 51-52 7. Klaudat 8. Ibid. 9. Hume, Enquiry, 50 10. Ibid. 11. Greenstreet, “Kant verus Hume on the Necessary Connection.” 12. Hume, Enquiry, 37