| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "HUME CAUSALITY THEORY": |
|
|
Hume's Causality Theory, 2007.
This paper discusses Hume's theory of causality to explain how and why we make judgments of causality.
1,482 words (approx. 5.9 pages), 9 sources, MLA, $ 48.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper examines David Hume's philosophy of causality that follows on from the empiricist philosophy. The paper discusses Hume's theory that people do not make judgments of how or why because causality does not exist. The paper explains the belief that only through the senses is information recorded, processed and inscribed upon our empty minds as a reaction to an aggregated association of thought. The paper stresses how empiricist philosophy denies the relevance of the person as a social, choosing being.
From the Paper
"David Hume (1711-1776) was the last and perhaps most controversially influential of "the three most famous British Empiricists of the eighteenth century" [John Locke 1632-1704, and George Berkeley (1685-1753](Flage 1). Although Hume's ideas had great impact on Immanuel Kant, Adam Smith, Jeremy Bentham, and Charles Darwin, the concept of empiricism can be traced back at least to Protagoras of Abdera, a fifth century Greek Sophist, who propounded the radical relativism that "Of all things the measure is man, of the things that are, that {or'how'] they are, and of things that [or 'how'] they are not" (Poster 4). Protagoras' taught that judgment of qualities, as abstractions like truth, are subjective, relative only to the individual observer. This, of course, is the basis of empiricism, the philosophy that all knowledge is derived from the experiences of the senses."
| |
|
Hume and Causality, 2004.
A look at philosopher David Hume's theory of causality.
1,562 words (approx. 6.2 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 51.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper provides a brief biographical section on David Hume before examining his theory on causality. The paper includes explanations of his notions of necessary connection, custom and habit, and the logical problems associated with causality.
From the Paper
"Perhaps the most significant work ever accomplished by David Hume is his argument on causality. As an empiricist, Hume attempted to make clear the limits of reason in human understanding. Hume shows how the majority of human beliefs are gained not through innate reasoning as rationalists since Plato had claimed, but through the experiences of the senses."
| |
|
The A-Priority of Causality, 2004.
Examines Kant's notion of causality in contrast to both Hume and Leibniz.
1,478 words (approx. 5.9 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 48.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Transcendental idealism is founded on the concept of the a priori. Few claims in philosophical history have encouraged as wide and vigourous a debate as this one idea. The a priori nature of causality has been the most cited example, and this paper takes a view of the playing field. Not only is Kant's theory of causality explained with care, but the paper also investigates how Kant stands in reference to traditional ("dogmatic") metaphysics, notably that of Leibniz and also to his powerful contempary, David Hume; with whom Kant had one eye on when writing "The Critique".
From the Paper
"Immanuel Kant?s "Critique of Pure Reason" is largely a response to popular philosophy of the time. This is true of Leibniz (and Wolff?s) ?dogmatic metaphysics?, but also true of the psychological approach of the British empiricists. The most resolute of these, in Kant?s mind, was David Hume, and Kant?s response to Hume?s treatment of causality is worthy of further examination."
| |
|
Consent Theory, 2002.
A study of the consent theory based books by John Locke and David Hume.
2,620 words (approx. 10.5 pages), 0 sources, MLA, $ 78.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
An analysis of the Consent Theory based on books by John Locke "A Letter Concerning Toleration" (1689) and David Hume "Of the Original Contract (1748). " The author of the paper shows that the Lockean theory of consent and Hume's idea of original contract are similar in that both believe the importance of the law, the recognition of who is the supreme ruler, and no property should be taken from someone without good and just cause. The paper ties the theory up with the question of law and obedience in the United States.
From the Paper
"Locke believed in religious right but stood firm in that the laws of the magistrate should be obeyed. He believed that no one should take another person's belongings should not be taken by others in regard to religious threats. However, Locke believed that if members of the society transgressed the laws, then the society "has power to remove any of its members who transgress the rules of its institution; but it cannot, by the accession of any new members, acquire any right of jurisdiction over those that are not joined with it." He believed that if someone did not obey the law, then they should be removed from its society. If a person wants to come to the United States, then he/she should follow the laws of the country."
| |
|
Emotive Theory, 2002.
A discussion of David Hume's philosophy that emotion and not reason drives or motivates a person to do what seems the right thing to do.
1,179 words (approx. 4.7 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 40.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines Hume's emotive thoery that whatever motivates a person is not reason ? as rationalists and other thinkers did and do ? but emotion and that reason cannot provide that motive and reason is not a desire. It analyzes Hume's two types of emotions: the self-regarding and the non-self-regarding and how pride is a typical example of the first type, whereby one takes pride in an achievement or possession because it is his or hers and how benevolence and sympathy are examples of the second type which do not consider any connection between the person/s receiving the emotions and the giver. It shows that the emotive theory of Hume is really an ethics of brotherhood, of humaneness and of love, which approximates the teachings of the New Testament on charity and in a much deeper way, resounds true brotherhood as taught by Christianity. This theory makes Hume sound less of a skeptic that he claims to be and more Christian than many pontificators.
From the Paper
"Hume also maintains that the goodness or rightness of human acts does not lie outside of the person performing such acts, but only inside of him. His philosophy is based only what is directly and physically experienced by the senses, which rejects reason. Good ? or evil -- acts, according to him, cannot be observed physically as the objective property of anything, and therefore, can come only from the observer?s mind. An act or thing is good because the observer feels it is good and it is bad because it repulses the observer. If it cannot be demonstrated, experienced, measured or proved empirically, to Hume it cannot be a fact."
| |
|
The Enduring Self and Social Contract Theory, 2002.
A proposal of different philosophical theories regarding the enduring self and social contract theory.
1,382 words (approx. 5.5 pages), 0 sources, $ 46.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper evaluates the views of some of the most famous philosophers on the theories of 'self' being an entity in its own right and social contract theory, that individuals living in isolation and without government would come together to form a government, binding themselves to a sovereign in exchange for protection. It shows amongst some of the views described in the paper how Descartes believed that the self was a continuing entity, how John Locke believed in the enduring self but stated that the existence of the self was dependent on memory, and how David Hume rejects the idea of the self as existing at all.
From the Paper
"The self is often thought of as interchangeable with the concept of identity, with an emphasis on the inner dimension of human consciousness and thought. The self is thought of as a part of consciousness. Descartes believed that the self was a continuing entity, the same throughout life. Descartes stated, ?I think, therefore I am,? indicating that reason was the source of all knowledge and that the application of reason alone demonstrated that the enduring self was a real entity. The concept has become bound with issues of perception. Descartes placed the source of all perceptions in reason, while others saw all knowledge as perceptual, perceived only through the senses, and therefore not trustworthy because the senses can be wrong. Descartes believed in the enduring self because he could reason that the self he knew endured in the same form at all times."
| |
|
Kant's Causality, 1995.
This paper discusses Kant's ideas of causal sequence of phenomena, freedom, moral action, inclination & duty.
2,025 words (approx. 8.1 pages), 6 sources, $ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"Immanuel Kant entered the realm of speculative cosmology, which he saw as centering on the idea of the world as the totality of the causal sequence of phenomena. In this way, he addressed what he saw as a conflict between ideas about human freedom and the general explanation of causality as offered by science. The issues raised included a concern for the meaning of human freedom, an understanding of how the human mind works, and a consideration of what this meant for moral reasoning.
The speculative cosmologist attempts to extend his or her knowledge of the world by means of synthetic a priori propositions. Kant stats, though, that this procedure leads to antimonies, and these arise when each of two contradictory propositions can be proved. If it is true that speculative cosmology leads to antimonies, then it must be assumed that its ... "
| |
|
Lack of Causality in "A Child Called It", 2004.
A negative critique of David Pelzer's autobiographic tale of child abuse.
1,900 words (approx. 7.6 pages), 1 source, APA, $ 60.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The author of the paper argues that David Pelzer's autobiographical account of his abusive childhood in "A Child Called It" is shocking, horrific and, at times, unbelievable. The paper explains the book's lack of causal connection and absence of future retributive consequences to David's tormentors created an impression of a book with no method or message.
From the Paper
"For me, actions that happen in a vacuum have no reality. People who exist outside the realm of cause and effect are not really people, and their erratic actions should not instill a fear that they can strike anyone at any time. No. But there is something even more dangerous about pushing cause and effect to the wayside. If we think of David's God as representing hope, he has killed his god in one deft swipe. Think about it: without the notion of evil having a cause, there is no way to figure out how to change it; without a possibility for change, hope flies out the window; and in the absence of hope, God is dead. Metaphorically speaking anyway."
| |
|
The Philosophy of David Hume, 2008.
The paper provides a brief overview of David Hume's theories and beliefs.
1,354 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 45.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper looks at Hume's examination of causation and the problems inherent in it, his theory of perception, his theory of knowledge or what he might call "inner perception" and finally his theory of the self. The paper also offers a brief look at his ideas on morality and religion. The paper concludes that the fact that Hume's "metaphysical microscope" continues to be found a provocative source of thought and philosophical contemplation three centuries after its author's death, is a testimony to the power of Hume's work.
From the Paper
"David Hume remains one of the most well-known and influential of British philosophers due to the broad scope of the ideas and the depth of analysis that are exhibited throughout his voluminous writings. His philosophical outlook has been described as something of a syncretism between naturalism and skepticism, and he builds upon the work of predecessors such as Berkeley and Locke while going beyond them on a number of levels. He is known for a profoundly skeptical epistemology in which he dissects and invalidates received wisdom and "common sense" about various topics including the nature of causation, the self, and religion; as a result, he was often denounced as "atheistic" by contemporaries, but his thought was a vital influence on later thinkers such as economist Adam Smith and philosopher Jeremy Bentham, not to mention (in the 19th century) Charles Darwin ("David Hume" 1.)"
| |
|
Hume and Descartes? Concept of Self, 2002.
A comparison of the concept of self as seen by David Hume and Rene Descartes.
4,395 words (approx. 17.6 pages), 16 sources, $ 115.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper introduces the notion of 'self' as presented by David Hume (1711-76) and contrasts it with the model by Descartes (1596-1650). In order to understand Humes' theory of self, his theory of knowledge is explored as well. Descartes's view on the duality of mind and body is then examined. The topic of identity is then explored with Hume's and Descartes' views evaluated within this discussion.
From the Paper
"To understand Hume?s conception of self, a little delving into his concept of theory of knowledge will be necessary. Hume concluded from his reasoning that no theory of reality is possible. In ?Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding? he classifies, after Locke, the objects of awareness into ?ideas? and ?impressions.? Ideas are derived from impressions. Impressions are derived form sense perceptions, or from internal consciousness. A word that does not directly stand for an impression has meaning only if it brings before the mind an object that can be gathered from an impression through sense perception or internal consciousness, and thus he dismisses the existence of content beyond the realm of experience.
All objects of awareness are either relations of ideas or matters of fact. Logical relations can be detected between ideas by rationality. Matters of facts cannot be demonstrated, except at the level of mathematics. If a rose is red, it is just a matter of fact; there is no logic within it. It could well have been blue or green. Hume then discusses the following questions regarding causal inference: from what impressions is it derived and what is its nature."
| |
|
Theories of Self, 2004.
This paper compares Hume?s and Kant?s theories of self.
1,905 words (approx. 7.6 pages), 3 sources, APA, $ 60.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that both Kant and Hume argue that there is no sense of self, but that people only have an incorrect impression that there is one; while the outcome is the same, it can be seen that the method of arriving at the conclusion is different. The author points out that, in Hume?s case, the sense of self is rejected because there is no impression that can result in the idea of the self. The paper states that, in Kant?s case, the sense of self is rejected because the mind cannot experience itself or reflect on itself, since the self would have to be involved in that reflection.
From the Paper
"Hume also rejects the idea of the soul saying, ?nor is there any single power of the soul, which remains unalterably the same, perhaps for one moment? (Hume, Book I, Part IV). Hume then goes on to explain why people tend to think they have a sense of self, by describing the tendency of the human mind to link things together. Hume?s theory is that the mind wants to link things, including wanting thought itself to be one linked item. The mind then invents the idea of a sense of self as a means of linking itself. In Hume?s view, this is a means of tricking oneself into believing that one?s thoughts are continuous, when in fact they are not. Overall then, in Hume?s view there is no real sense of self. Instead, there is just a bundle of impressions, which the mind tricks itself into believing is one continuously existing object."
| |
|
David Hume, 2002.
An examination of "Moral Distinctions Not Derived from Reason", an excerpt from "A Treatise of Human Nature" by David Hume, and a comparison of moral theories between Hume and J.L. Mackie.
1,923 words (approx. 7.7 pages), 1 source, $ 61.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
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."
| |
|
David Hume's Philosophy, 2006.
This paper argues that David Hume's definitions of determinism and necessity are not compatible.
1,453 words (approx. 5.8 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 48.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper argues that, within the confines of Hume's definition of liberty and necessity in his "Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding", Hume claims that free will and necessity are compatible; however, outside his definitions, the theory falls apart. The author points out that Hume's definition of necessity starts with his deterministic beliefs. The paper relates issues of the incompatibility of these two concepts and the definitions Hume uses to explain them: (1) Laws to human behavior always have exceptions; (2) Hume's analysis of what is required for responsibility helps to explain why it is useless to deny determinism by appealing to the existence of chance events in the world to disprove Hume's definition of liberty and, (3) if Hume's definition of liberty with the "could-have-done-otherwise" principle are replace, the compatibility of liberty and necessity disappears.
From the Paper
"If you combine Hume's determinism concerning human actions with his theory of causation, you basically have his working definition of necessity. Hume believes that there are observable, constant conjunctions between motives (including character traits) and actions in human behavior and goes so far as to claim if one were to look over human history, one discovers that the "same motives always produce the same actions." In Hume's conception of the world, it would be a violation of the law of nature for a prior event to occur and a subsequent event not to and this picture of the universe as law-governed applies just as much to human actions as it does to the behavior of the rest of the natural world."
| |
|
Causal Determines, 2002.
An insight into the theory behind causal determinism.
1,150 words (approx. 4.6 pages), 4 sources, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses causal determines. Causality, the relation between two items one of which causes the other, is often probabilistic. Causal determinism implies that something must have caused something else. The issue of right versus wrong would not occur if there was no wrongdoing. Three criteria to determine the right versus wrong dilemma are violation of law, departure from truth, and deviation from moral conduct. Ethical theories reflect on concepts of moral issues.
| |
|
David Hume on Human Judgements, 2005.
This paper discusses 'Section VII" of David Hume's "Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding" which concludes that reason and rational judgments are merely habitual associations based on previous experiences.
1,440 words (approx. 5.8 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that 'Section VII" of David Hume'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."
|
|
|
