Abstract This paper reviews DavidHume's "Inquiry IV" on matters of fact and relation of ideas, geometry and value, cause and effect. The author presents Hume's conclusions on matters of thought. The paper compares Hume to Descartes.
From the Paper "David Hume considered the nature of thought and drew two important conclusions. First, an idea is real only if it is derived from or reducible to sense impressions and, second ,a term is meaningful only if it stands ..."
Abstract In this article, the writer discusses some of the ideas of the 18th century Scottish philosopher, DavidHume. The writer examines Hume's concept of cause and effect. DavidHume's use of reason versus experience is discussed in this paper. The writer also looks at Hume's view of religion.
From the Paper "David Hume was an eighteenth century Scottish philosopher and historian. He believed that the biggest obstacle to improvement in the moral or metaphysical sciences was what he referred to as the obscurity of the ideas and ambiguity of the terms. Hume argued that conventional definitions defining terms in terms of other terms create confusion by substituting synonyms for the original and thus never break new ground. Stephen Miller writing in "Wilson Quarterly" explains that Hume believed determining the cognitive content of a idea or term required ... "
Abstract This paper examines the philosophical outlooks of Immanuel Kant and DavidHume, with the author concluding that Kant's perspective is preferable. Kant's opinion on how one gains knowledge is contrasted with Hume's. Both perspectives on the contribution of experience to knowledge and the role of the "self" and a personal "world" are also considered.
Outline:
Introduction
Exposition
Conclusion
From the Paper "In his principal book entitled, "The Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals," Kant explains why only the categorical imperative is the valid standard of moral obligation (Abbott 2006, Richards 2006, McCormick 2006). He limits his discussion to specific willful actions in moral situations or conditions, where the will is, or should be, influenced only by reason or rational considerations, rather than by subjective or emotional considerations, such as laziness, convenience, or advantage . He writes that morality involves what actions are necessary and that concept comes only from reason or rational considerations. These rational considerations must, in turn, be a "single principle of obligation (Richards)." It must also be stated as a command and has no reference to, or weighed against, the consequences of the action. Kant then says that only the categorical imperative fulfills all these conditions (Richards, Abbott, McCormick)."
This paper discusses philosopher DavidHume's concept that there can be no evidence for miracles, based on his essay "On Miracles", Section Ten of "Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding".
1,620 words (approx. 6.5 pages), 0 sources, $ 52.95
Abstract This paper explains that DavidHume argues that there can be no evidence for miracles, in spite of the many claims made for miracles throughout historical and religious literature; if there were evidence for a "miracle", then it would no longer be a miracle but rather just a new scientific fact. The author points out that miracles are mostly based on claims and testimony and not at all on hard evidence; the more outlandish the claims, the more probable it is that the testimony is false even if the witness is credible. The paper stresses that, according to Hume, belief in the miracles in the Bible is an extension of this human psychological need.
From the Paper "Therefore, the laws of religion cannot be classified as the laws of nature. Miracles are in most cases permitted by the laws of religion but not by the laws of nature. Hume does not deny the efficacy of religion, but he does want to distinguish the laws of religion from the laws of science. The laws of science are based on direct human experience, which is backed up by the experiences of others and found to be consistent and reliable over time. Few people know someone who has experienced a "miracle," let alone having experienced one first hand. When we do experience a "miracle" first hand, there is usually a scientific explanation for the experience."
Abstract DavidHume was an undeniably brilliant philosopher who, at times, suffered in his writing the inability to adequately express his actual philosophy and thoughts. One of his most stunning arguments was, in actuality, a refutation of the Skeptics, a movement started in great part by Descartes, who attempted to convince Aristotelian philosophers that our experiences with the world are based solely upon our senses and, as such, our senses and thus our perception of the world and reality can be deceived. Therefore, the skeptic encourages us to question the validity of trusting only our senses for our knowledge of the world. While Descartes' and the other Skeptics' arguments were and continue to be the stuff of philosophical cliche (the "prove you exist" argument) the truth is that, as DavidHume points out, there is no real point in pondering whether or not we actually exist. The fact of this futility is proven in the very real problem in that if we assume that the universe is the individual creation of just the "I", then the very same person is also taking on the role of God, which, according to Hume and others like him, is an impossibility. The ultimate end of the Skeptics argument, if you follow it to its logical conclusion, is that it is possible that all of us are the creation of some one person's imagination and that, as such, our existence is subject to the whims of one person's perception of reality and the self. Hume's argument, that such skeptical investigations of reality and the actuality of the self is pointless, is one which has a great deal of validity. But, there are counter arguments to his counter-argument, and in the interests of a full academic exploration of his philosophy, it is necessary to explore some of those arguments. It is the purpose of this paper, then, to examine three problems found in Hume's argument and to demonstrate that the exploration of reality from a skeptical point of view is nothing more than an exercise of thought, one that can ultimately only lead lead to psychological diagnoses of breaks in sanity rather than a treatise on our actual reality.
Abstract In this article, the writer notes that DavidHume was seen as a very prominent figure in history both in the Scottish enlightenment and in Western philosophy. The writer notes that interest in Hume's work in recent years has become more centered on the philosophical writing that he did, but it was for being a historian that he originally gained some notoriety. The writer points out that much of what Hume had to say became closely involved with others as they examined their own philosophies and ideas. This made Hume's work much more significant because so much of what he stated and believed in was studied by others and expanded on as time passed. The writer concludes that Hume meant a great deal to many philosophers, and this is part of the reason that his work is still so alive and important today while the work of others of his time have not been as closely studied.
From the Paper "In David Hume's article on empiricism, he attempts to show how some things that people believe to be real are the product of false knowledge, and there is a difference between things that people perceive to be true and things that actually are true. Hume's theory is that only things that can be proven, such as mathematics, are absolutely true. Other things may seem to be true because something usually happens related to something else, but even though this seems to always be the case there is room for argument in that it does not have to be the case every time, simply because it has happened that way in the past. Hume believes that the only truth is mathematical truth, and that there are many other things in the world that people falsely perceive to be true because they have not subjected those things to an examination that is serious enough to show otherwise."
Abstract This paper explains that, in his essay "Of the Original Contract", DavidHume affirmed that the sovereign power of the government emanated from the people themselves; thus, the people have the power to resist the sovereign power of the government whenever the government fails to do its intended job. The author points out that, in general, contractarianism is an agreement between the society and the people in power for the purpose of maintaining peace and order. The paper relates that Hume focused not on the power of the individual, but on the power of these individuals as group or community. The author also notes Hume's belief that, without a society, there is no government but there can still be a society even without a government.
Table of Contents:
Contractarianism and its Forms
Hume on the Variants of Contractarianism
Hume in his own Refutations
Modernity and Civil Society
From the Paper "One will also notice that as to compare with other contractarians, given the situation, David Hume justified the resistance and disobedience on the part of the people from the sovereign government. It is also noticeable that his concept of contract is far less individualistic and statist. I believe so because Hume focused not on the power of the individual but on the power of these individuals as group or community. I believe this subject, the power of the community, is the consent of the people rendered and given to the government."
Tags: contractarianism, refutations, statist, society, people
Abstract This paper discusses the philosophy of DavidHume, noting that he gave precedence to what he called sense impressions. The paper explains that Hume felt that humans cannot use the process of cause and effect to understand their universe because the world is constantly changing. The paper further explains Humes belief that, although human are able to form ideas through their experiences, their knowledge is limited because one event simply does not follow another. The paper also presents examples of Hume's conclusion that people are not able to experience the power, which starts one event after another through their sense impressions; therefore, human beings are unable to truly know the world.
From the Paper "Hume continues on with the third principle of association, cause and effect. Hume restates that cause and effects are ways in which we organize our sense impressions, since one follows another. To Hume, this kind of contiguity that one sense impression follows another creates a sense of togetherness, and that because one sense impression always follows another, we have become accustom to cause and effect. An example of this is how the first time we put our hand in front of a fire, our hand gets hot and feels the heat."
Tags: association experiences, sense impressions, example resemblance
An examination of "Moral Distinctions Not Derived from Reason", an excerpt from "A Treatise of Human Nature" by DavidHume, and a comparison of moral theories between Hume and J.L. Mackie.
1,923 words (approx. 7.7 pages), 1 source, 2002, $ 61.95
Abstract According to Hume, morality is not a judgement about matters of fact. This paper analyzes Hume's philosophy and explains his basic arguments against the idea that moral pronouncements are judgments of reason. In addition, this papers analyzes the differences between Hume's philosophy and that of J.L. Mackie, who argued that there are no moral truths. Lastly, the paper identifies the manner in which one can agree with Hume, while not being a moral skeptic.
From the Paper "I do believe that it is entirely possible for an individual to subscribe to Hume's beliefs, without being a moral skeptic. While Hume, like all moral skeptics, denies the existence of objective moral values, he does not dismiss the concept of universal human sentiment. Often the notion of skepticism is little more than an abusive label, and at other times it is taken to mean only that one denies knowledge of some fact which most people accept. To say that Hume is a moral skeptic in either of these senses would, of course, be unpersuasive because similar charges could be brought against almost any moral theory."
Abstract This paper offers a detailed summary of the arguments in DavidHume's book, "A Treatise on Human Nature". The author supports her interpretations by quotes, focuses upon Hume's content rather than his style, and evaluates the merits of Hume's arguments.
Abstract This paper discusses the article by DavidHume entitled "That Politics May be Reduced to a Science", examining the nature of government and the differences which create argument and dissension. The paper explains that some maintain that all the goodness of government derives from the goodness of the administration, which also means that a bad government derives from a bad administration. Examples are cited showing that this is the case and Hume states that all absolute governments depend on the administration, which he sees as a weakness in the form of government. On the other hand, he states that a republican and free government would be an absurdity unless there were real controls imposed by a constitution. Hume then discusses the nature of law in regard to government and thereby attempts to reduce politics to a science.
From the Paper "Hume's analysis of government is extensive and detailed, including different types of ruler and the characteristics that such a ruler might manifest. He discusses the Nobility and its behavior in office. This leads to his statement of an axiom he says is universal, that "an hereditary prince, a nobility without vassals, and a people voting by their representatives, form the best monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy" (76). This statement is further an example of the sort of general truths that Hume says can be made about politics and that, therefore, can make politics a science."
This paper discusses 'Section VII" of DavidHume's "Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding" which concludes that reason and rational judgments are merely habitual associations based on previous experiences.
Abstract This paper explains that 'Section VII" of DavidHume's "Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding" opens by differentiating the mental processes associated with the exact and provable mathematical nature of science in the natural world and what he calls "the finer sentiments of the mind". The author points out that Hume recognizes the validity of science and the physical world and does not dispute the logical deductions made from observance and experimentation; however, he says knowledge itself is not a finite object that is subject to science and mathematics. The paper stresses that Hume does not question of God exists or whether man has a sou but rather he says that these things are not known and therefore causal theories, which rest on the supposition that they do exist, cannot be true.
From the Paper "He uses the sun rising every day as an example, inferring that the fact that the sun has always risen every day does not, logically at least, mean that it will rise tomorrow. The reason that the sun rises every day is a function of physics, and the fact that the sun rises one day is not connected to its rising the previous day, but to those laws of physical motion. Thoughts, ideas and impressions cannot be measured in physical terms. A weakness in this argument would seem to be that he is separating deductive reasoning based on observable facts from the conclusions established in the mind regarding these facts. While he dismisses thought as an abstraction separate from science, he contends that space and time are the way impressions occur to us and these abstractions are the basis of ideas."
Abstract This paper presents an explanation of DavidHume's theory of the origin of morality in human sentiments. It describes Hume's reduction of morals to feelings of pleasure, pain, fear and sympathy. It also discusses Hume's view that for the "enlightened" individual, ethical altruism rather than ethical egoism should be pursued.
From the Paper " David Hume was an eighteenth century philosopher and historian. Hume believed that the biggest obstacle to improvement in the moral or metaphysical sciences was what he referred to as the obscurity of the ideas and ambiguity of the ..."
Abstract This paper analyzes and reviews DavidHume's essay, "An Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding," in which he attempts to show what we do and do not know about causation. It analyzes Hume's arguments in his essay, particularly with respect to the idea of necessary connection and presents examples of how Hume's arguments can be applied to day-to-day life.
From the Paper "Hume's Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding is a remarkable essay, and to grasp it fully requires maintaining the rigid intellectual distinctions that Hume did maintain. Again, his inquiry focuses on what we know about the world, not what the world is or how it behaves. Indeed, Hume concludes that what we know about the world is limited, and we must rely on our limited understanding to allow us to carry on our day-to-day affairs. Hume set himself apart from the rationalist metaphysicians, who wrestled with questions about the nature of the universe, whether or not there is a God, and the immortality of soul. Hume's inquiry was essentially a preliminary to this: how do we know what we know. How can we ask if there is a God if we cannot know what the causal connection is in the world around us."
Abstract This philosophical study examines the basis of knowledge and ideas within the works of George Berkeley and DavidHume. By realizing that Berkeley does not define reality through the human sensory apparatus, human beings can only realize the world around them as ideas that exist only within the mind. Hume also agrees with this philosophy through his empirical perspective, but is not absolutist in realizing how nature and faith act as 'guides' in human perception of the world.
