Free Essay

Hume

In: Philosophy and Psychology

Submitted By arodwho524
Words 641
Pages 3
Bertrand Russell famously summarized Hume's contribution to philosophy, saying that he "developed to its logical conclusion the empiricist philosophy of Locke and Berkeley, and by making it self-consistent made it incredible." Hume is remarkable in that he does not shy away from conclusions that might seem unlikely or unreasonable. Ultimately, he concludes that we have no good reason to believe almost everything we believe about the world, but that this is not such a bad thing. Nature helps us to get by where reason lets us down.
Hume is unquestionably an empiricist philosopher, and he strives to bring the rigor of scientific methodology to bear on philosophical reasoning. His distinction between relations of ideas and matters of fact is absolutely crucial in this respect. Anything we can say about the world is a matter of fact, and thus can be justified only through experience and can be denied without contradiction. Relations of ideas can teach us about mathematical truths, but cannot, as some rationalist philosophers would have, teach us about the existence of our selves, an external world, or God.
If we are left with only matters of fact to get us by in the world, however, we find ourselves greatly limited. How can past experience teach me anything about the future? Even to infer without circularity that future experience will resemble past experience requires some principle that cannot be grounded in past experience. Without that principle, our ability to reason according to cause and effect, and thus the greater part of our ability to reason with matters of fact, is sharply curtailed.
We should be careful to note the tone Hume's skepticism takes here, however. Rather than conclude that we cannot know anything about future events or the external world, he concludes that we are not rationally justified in believing the things we do. Hume does not deny that we make certain inferences based on causal reasoning, and indeed insists that we would be unable to live if we didn't do so. His point is simply that we are mistaken if we think that these inferences are in any way justified by reason. That is, there are no grounds for certainty or proof of these inferences.
Hume is a naturalist because he suggests that nature, and not reason, leads us to believe the things we do. Habit has taught us that we are safe in making certain inferences and believing certain things, and so we don't normally worry about them too much. We cannot prove that there is a world external to our senses, but it seems to be a relatively safe assumption by which to live. Rather than try to justify our beliefs or identify the truth, Hume seeks simply to explain why we believe what we believe.
The Enquiry is decidedly a book about epistemology and not about metaphysics. That is, Hume is concerned about what and how we know, and not at all about what is actually the case. For instance, he does not deal with the question of whether there actually are necessary connections between events, he simply asserts that we cannot perceive them. Or perhaps more accurately, Hume argues that, because we cannot perceive necessary connections between events, the question of whether or not they actually exist is irrelevant and meaningless.

Hume is an ardent opponent of rationalist metaphysics, which seeks to answer questions such as whether or not God exists, what the nature or matter and soul is, or whether the soul is immortal. The mind, according to Hume, is not a truth-tracking device, and we misuse it if we think it can bring us to metaphysical conclusions. A Humean science of the mind can describe how the mind works and why it reaches the conclusions it does, but it cannot take us beyond the confines of our own, natural, reason.

Similar Documents

Free Essay

David Hume

...intelligent being to bring this action about. This being is God. The 18th-century philosopher David Hume wrote a book named Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion in which he criticised Aquinas’s teleological argument, and several other teleological arguments. Firstly, Hume says that the apparent intelligent functioning of many unintelligent bodies – e.g., the complex systems by which plants take up minerals from the soil to cause water uptake into their roots – can be explained by the ideas of natural selection and survival of the fittest, by which the organisms that happen by chance mutations to be most well-adapted to their environments are the ones which survive to reproduce, making their functions appear to be ordered specifically for their environments and therefore seeming designed. Therefore, apparent design may well not be in fact design. Hume uses this idea to criticise the major premise of Aquinas’s teleological argument. Hume also asserts that the world does not necessarily point to an intelligent designer. He uses the apparent cruelty often observed in nature – said to be “red in tooth and claw” – to argue that even if the universe had been designed, it was designed with flaws. For example, cats play with their prey for some time before they kill and eat it. The prey is caused to suffer unnecessarily by this – i.e., the suffering does not contribute to the cat’s survival. This, Hume posits, is one of many instances of flaws in the world. If the world was......

Words: 774 - Pages: 4

Free Essay

David Hume

...David Hume “Hume is our Politics, Hume is our Trade, Hume is our Philosophy, Hume is our Religion.” philosopher James Hutchison Stirling Biographical Information * He was born in 1711 in Edinburgh, Scotland, and died in 1776 * Was born in upper middle class family, his father died when David still a child, his mother, Katherine Falconer, who was from a family of lawyers, David never married * Main interests: Metaphysics, Epistemology, Mind, Ethics, Politics, Aesthetics, Religion * Hume as the third and most radical of the British Empiricists, after the English John Locke and the Arish George Berkeley. * 1723 (age of 12) After an early education at home enters Edinburg University where he begins the study of law, three years later turns from the study of law to pursue an intense independent study of his own devising. * In 1752 was employment as librarian of the Advocate’s Library in Edinburgh * n 1763, Hume accepted as a private secretary for Lord Hertford, the Ambassador to France, * He thought this science should be based on “experience and observation”. (Spiegel 206) * Between (1744-1745), Hume was a candidate for the Chair of Moral Philosophy at the University of Edinburgh, but was rejected mostly due to the protest concerning his anti-religious writings * He wrote profoundly influential works on epistemology, ethics, and the philosophy of religion, and was also published on politics, economics and history. * Hume......

Words: 520 - Pages: 3

Free Essay

Hume and Religion

...religion in terms of the skepticism and naturalism that features prominently in his Treatise of Human Nature (1739-40), his first and most ambitious philosophical work. According to the account that is now widely accepted in the scholarly literature, Hume removed almost all the material in the Treatise that was concerned with religion because he was anxious to avoid causing any “offence” among the orthodox. In his later works, beginning with an Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding (1748), Hume began to present his views on this subject in a more substantial and direct manner. This culminates in his Natural History of Religion (1757) and Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (1779; published posthumously) – both of which are entirely taken up with philosophical issues in religion. The linkage between these various works, on this account, is that the later writings on religion are simply an extension and application of the sceptical and naturalistic principles that Hume developed in his earlier writings. While it is certainly true that there is an intimate connection between Hume's scepticism and naturalism and his irreligious objectives and orientation, it is not evident that this relationship should be understood in terms of Hume drawing irreligious consequences in his later work from the sceptical and naturalistic principles that he laid down in his earlier work. There is a more intimate connection between these components of Hume's philosophy than this account......

Words: 1814 - Pages: 8

Free Essay

Hume on Miracles

...Hume and miracles Examine Hume’s views on miracles. Hume rejected the idea of miracles due to his belief they were beyond the realms of reasonable belief there are other interpretations of the events which would be more likely. Hume believes wise and sensible people will form their beliefs on evidence. Therefore it must be more likely that it is true than it being false before they believe it. Hume argued we should weigh up the evidence in the case of miracles. We should look at which more likely; natural rules will have held good, or is it more likely that a miracle will have taken place. By Hume’s thinking our past experiences have shown us that for example, we can’t turn water into wine, we can’t rise from the dead, we can’t walk on water, therefore the whole weight of past experiences we have had bears this out. This leads to us being sceptical when it comes when looking at reports that something different has happened. You have several choices when/if someone tells you they’ve witnessed a miracle. You could believe what the person is telling you, if you know the person well enough and know they usually tell the truth then you would do so. However, you could believe that the person is mistaken or deceiving you on purpose. For Hume, he argued that a reasonable person would choose the most likely of the choices, even though it may be unlikely that the person is deceiving you and unlikely that they’ve made a mistake it will always be more unlikely that a miracle has...

Words: 1496 - Pages: 6

Premium Essay

Comparing Kant and Hume

...Hume claims that judgments of causality are completely constructed by the mind and they are a result of "habit" or "custom." We have a habit of thinking causally. But Hume does not say this is a bad thing, since without this habit we would not be able to function in everyday life. He even calls causality the "cement of the universe." For Hume, our judgments of causality are determined by three factors: 1) constant conjunction: we continuously see one event that follows from another event in experience. For example, I see that one ball hits another ball, and that second ball moves, and this has happened many times; 2) contiguity: the two things must be close to each other in space and time; and 3) association between ideas: I have an idea of one ball moving, and the idea of another being hit and moving. So, causality does not belong in the objects seen, but only in the mind. Causality is not a real feature of the world, but only a way we interpret events in the world. In this way, Hume's account of causality points to his broader position that we cannot have any knowledge of the world---or even be in a position to know that we have knowledge. Hume observes that while we may perceive two events that seem to occur in conjunction, there is no way for us to know the nature of their connection. Based on this observation, Hume argues against the very concept of causation, or cause and effect. We often assume that one thing causes another, but it is just as possible that one......

Words: 2158 - Pages: 9

Free Essay

Kant Versus Hume

...Kant VS Hume David Hume works from world to mind, Immanuel Kant from mind to world. Hume, how we experience the world is conditioned by the world. Kant, how we experience the world is conditioned by the mind. Most contemporary philosophers believe that Hume refuted the views of the rationalists before him (Descartes, Hobbes Spinoza, and Leibniz), who all held that there is an element of genuine a priori reasoning in causal inference. According to Hume, however, causal relations are not logically necessary, and hence they cannot be known a priori. To say that even if A caused B, it is not logically impossible to suppose that, given A, B might not have occurred. (De Pierris) So far as reason and logic are concerned, given a particular event, anything may happen next. This is precisely the reason why causal relations cannot be known a priori; in order to determine whether or not a causal relation holds between A and B we must rely on our experience of similar relations. "There are no objects," wrote Hume, "which by the mere survey, without consulting experience; we can determine to be the causes of any other; and no objects, which we can certainly determine in the same manner not to be the causes" (Lorkowski) Hume analyzed the idea of causality by emphasizing the three demands that can be verified through observation. First he argued the aspect of constant conjunction. In this aspect, the cause and effect must be spatially and constantly existent. Secondly, he asserted......

Words: 971 - Pages: 4

Free Essay

David Hume and Determinism

...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......

Words: 1086 - Pages: 5

Premium Essay

Hume: Philosophy and Moral Ethics

...Quiz #1 Questions 1. Give full and logical descriptions of the philosophy. Biography is optional. 2. Give any comparison you consider interesting. Pro/Con Philosophers 3. Your personal opinion about this philosophy. David Hume 1 Biography 1711 – 1776 Scottish Philosopher Self-Proclaimed Agnostic Did not believe we could answer the question, “Does God exist?” Exiled and moved to France Leading thinker in European enlightenment Wrote treaties on ethics, knowledge, religion, and human nature. Was called, “Good David”, remarkably kind and humorous, or the Scottish Skeptic Essay, “Of Self-Love” Essay, “Moral Distinction not Derived from Reason” All action is motivated by selfishness, or “self-love”. This claim in psychological egoism is at odds with our regular experiences with people In which we act with “such affections as love, friendship, compassion, and gratitude”. Reducing things down to one cause may work in natural sciences, but it is unnecessary and inaccurate in the human sciences. In “Moral Distinctions not Derived from Reason”, argues that morality is not based solely on pure rationality, but on our “sentiments,” Sentiments – Our feelings of acceptance or disapproval. Thus, moral thinking is also moral *feeling* Supported by examining cases of moral “turpitude” 1. Incest 2. Murder 3. Ingratitude “To [even] the most careless observer, there appear to be such......

Words: 391 - Pages: 2

Free Essay

Asses Humes Reason for Rejecting Miracles. (35) 

...Asses Humes reason for rejecting miracles. (35)  Hume defines a miracle as a transgression of a natural law by a particular volition of the deity. This does not imply that a miracle is an extraordinary event but it is one that breaks the natural law and that it is brought about by the action of God. Other two definitions would be that a miracle is an event that has religious significance and this does not need to have broken the laws of nature to be regarded as a miracle but it needs to reveal something about God. The last definition of a miracle is a view of Thomas Aquinas who defines miracles as an event caused by God. In this essay I will be discussing why Hume rejects miracles and arguments for and against his theories. Hume was an empiricist, so he believed that it was more likely that the report of a miracle was mistaken than the laws of nature were violated. He did not say that miracles did not happen, but that it would be impossible to prove them. Hume’s argument is based on the principle of induction, which is the suggestion that future events will take place based on previous evidence. This is because evidence from people’s experience of observing the world showed the laws of nature to be fixed and unvarying. For example, the sun has risen every day in the past, so it is very likely that it will rise again and not stand still in the sky. However, Hume did accept that whatever happened countless times in the past did not guarantee such would happen again in...

Words: 703 - Pages: 3

Free Essay

Hume

...Q. Explain Humes’ criticisms of the cosmological argument (25 marks) The cosmological argument is based on the principle of causation. In particular, it is put forward that any existent thing must have a cause or reason for its existence and that there cannot be more in the effect than there is in the cause. Hume challenges these assumptions in his Dialogues. There are three main critiques that Hume makes of the argument. Firstly, he has general concerns about the way it is structured, and believes that this structure is fallacious. Secondly, he has more specific concerns related to causation and finally he raises challenges to do with the concepts of contingency and necessity. Hume’s challenges to the structure of the cosmological argument directly question the validity of the assumption that existent things need causes or reasons for their existence. Hume says that just because each of the elements of the ‘chain’ has a cause, it doesn’t follow that the chain itself needs a cause. He gives the example of a collection of twenty particles – if an explanation is found for each particle individually he says it would be wrong to then seek an explanation for the whole collection, because you have already explained it by explaining each particle. This is called the fallacy of composition, and was later simply put by Russell that just because every man has a mother, it doesn’t mean that there is a mother of the human race. Hume also has some challenges to the notion of......

Words: 733 - Pages: 3

Free Essay

David Hume

...David Hume Empirist, skeptiker og nominalist. Hva er det vi kan vite sikkert og hvor kommer denne viten fra? Målet er å undersøke våre forestillinger og tanker i den hensikt å bekrefte/avkrefte deres sannhets- eller gyldighetsgrad. Analytisk kunnskap: kunnskap om forhold mellom begreper: logikk og matte. Sier ikke noe nytt om verden rundt oss. Syntetisk kunnskap: Gir oss ny informasjon om subjektet. Baserer seg på sanseinntrykkene. Den er ikke sikker kunnskap, da sanseinntrykkene kan lure oss, men det er det nærmeste vi kan komme kunnskap om verden. Det finnes ikke noe kunnskap om verden som ikke har sitt opphav i sanseerfaringen → det ligger til grunn for empirismen. Inntrykk: en form for erfaring, umiddelbar, blir skapt i oss ved hjelp av sanseinntrykkene, en direkte opplevelse av noe. Forestilling; en form for erfaring; inntrykk man tenker tilbake på og minnes, mattere og mindre klare enn inntrykkene, noe vi i siste instans fører tilbake til sanseinntrykk. Sammensatte forestillinger: inntrykk og forestillinger settes sammen, noen ganger til rare kombinasjoner som for eksempel forestillingen om Gud. Gud er dermed ikke basert på noen sansning av Gud selv. Assosiasjonsprinsippene ”liket”: gruppering av enkeltting → hume som nominalist. Assosiasjonsprinsippet ”sammenheng”: vi slutter fra en ting til det som er i nærheten → fra en stjerne til alle de andre stjernene. Assosiasjonsprinsippet ”Årsak/virkning”: kritiserer årsaksbegrepet!! Biljardkulene →......

Words: 890 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Hume on Miracles

...Evaluate the claim that belief in miracles leads to a belief in a God who favours some but not all of his creation. 35m The definition of the word ‘miracle’ has not been unanimously agreed upon by scholars and thinkers. Hume famously defined miracles as ‘violations of the laws of nature by a particular volition of the deity.’ It can be argued that Hume would agree that belief in miracles would lead to a God who favoured some but not all of his creation as they are defined by him as exceptions to the norm based purely on the ‘volition’ (or will) of God. In this sense God would therefore decide when and where to intervene. The fundamental problem with this position is the anthropomorphic language which is used to describe God, many would argue that God does not act from volition because He does not have human attributes or limitations. Maurice Wiles argued that a God who intervenes selectively would not be worthy of worship due to his failure to act on a wider scale. Wiles argue that such a God would be guilty of being arbitrary (acting on random choices) and partisan (seeming to support a certain party or group). Wiles is concerned that a God who performs miracles, in the traditional sense, is picking and choosing who to perform miracles for, relieving suffering for some and allowing it to happen to others. He argues that the believer is subsequently left with two choices: to reject belief in miracles and petitionary prayer, or to accept that God is morally culpable for......

Words: 862 - Pages: 4

Free Essay

Hume and Descarates

...Exploring the Epistemology’s of Rene Descartes and David Hume Beginning in the 17th century, traditional ideas were being questioned by the new beginnings of science. Although many of the accomplishments during this “scientific revolution” were in astronomy and mechanics, very important advances along the whole borders of knowledge were also taking place. The revival of skepticism, brought about by these new concepts, had many philosophers seeking answers to questions such as: Do we know anything at all, and do the sciences give us knowledge of reality? Rene Descartes, whom many consider to be the father of modern philosophy, sought to kill skepticism for good. He gave his Cartesian quest for certainty the center stage in his epistemology, or theory of knowledge. Following Descartes, later in the 18th century, David Hume also broke away from the religious dogma of the day to explain knowledge on a non theological basis. However, His epistemology dismisses Cartesian methods as both unworkable and barren. Instead, he adopts his own theories which counters the ideas of his of predecessor, and casts a different view on the levels of certainty humans can The Content and Objects of Knowledge--Rene Descartes According to Descartes, we each contain within ourselves the criterion for truth and knowledge. Although he does not reject the idea of God as a creator, he believed that the responsibility of obtaining knowledge rests on the individual and no longer on...

Words: 1648 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay

David Hume

...Renaissance to Revolution Term Paper Abbas Ali David Hume and the Fallacy (Philosophy) of Religion David Hume is considered the greatest philosopher Britain has produced and an intellectual hero to many atheists. His arguments against religion are clear, incisive and devastating. However, some people have misconstrued his agnosticism to represent faith and claim that while Hume challenged conventional religion, he himself believed in God. In this paper I will attempt to refute some of these claims by briefly highlighting some of Hume’s most compelling arguments against religion and showing how they leave little room for belief. I will also delve into some of the context surrounding Hume’s work to show how speaking against religion was a dangerous game in those times and restricted Hume’s ability to speak freely. Some of the primary sources used for this paper include Hume’s most famous works on religion, including The Natural History of Religion and Dialogues concerning Natural Religion. Secondary and tertiary sources include scholarly critiques of Hume’s texts as well as reviews and journals interpreting his work one way or another. To start with, lets have a look at an excerpt from, The Natural History of Religion, published in 1757. In the following passage, Hume summarizes his views on religion as “sick men’s dreams”: What a noble privilege is it of human reason to attain the knowledge of the supreme Being; and, from the visible works of nature, be enabled to......

Words: 1858 - Pages: 8

Premium Essay

Humes Ethics

...Hume’s Ethics Contents 1. Introduction 2. Hume’s ethics as an emotive theory of ethics 3. Conclusion 4. Bibliography David Hume is an outstanding Scottish philosopher of the 18th century whose views has a significant impact on the following generations of thinkers throughout the world. His sceptical arguments concerning induction, causation and especially religion, including his famous thesis that human knowledge arises only from sense experience and not from rational judgments, shaped the 19th and 20th century empiricist philosophy. His famous saying that ‘reason is the slave of the passions’ is a cornerstone of his ethical views largely explains the emotive character of his ethics. Hume’s ethics as an emotive theory of ethics In his works David Hume paid a lot of attention to ethical and moral problems he wanted to discuss these issues and presented his own particular views. At this respect it is worth to mention his moral theory basically depicted in Book 3 of the Treatise, titled “Of Morals”. The author basically discusses the principle issue of his ethics whether moral distinctions are derived from reason. To put it more precisely David Hume discusses the question concerning whether human moral approval is a rational judgment about conceptual relations and facts or an emotional response. On analysing such a dilemma, Hume arrives to the conclusion that it is rather an emotional response that has little, if has any at all, in common with reason. Moreover, it is......

Words: 1054 - Pages: 5