Hume Analysis Although both Berkeley and Hume are influenced by Locke’s empiricist notions, Hume, unlike Berkeley, is not trying to defeat skepticism; instead he considers skepticism to be what inevitably results from following Locke’s ideas to their logical conclusion. He is deeply skeptical of causality and discusses the problem of induction, which is unprecedented amongst empiricists. Hume builds his skeptical foundation on the notion of sense perception, which he breaks down into ideas and impressions. He differentiates between the two with degrees of force and liveliness – impressions tend to be more forceful, while ideas are weaker as they are reflections of impressions. Simple ideas and impressions correspond with each other exactly, …show more content…
For the latter he considers questions that Berkeley had previously solved with idealism, such as why we assume that external objects have continued existence distinct from our perception of them. Instead of dismissing them entirely as Berkeley does, Hume opts for explaining why people tend to believe that things endure through time and why we have concepts of personal identity although there is nothing directly through reason or sense that would lead us to believe in such things, and his answer ultimately is imagination. He thinks it is pointless to seriously question whether or not the body exists, and instead focuses on what would induce us to believe in the existence of the …show more content…
Hume argues that there is no way to experience through impressions things like our souls, and that therefore the notion of a soul or other things - such as God - that are not directly available to us in the form of impressions are merely illusions, and we have no reason to believe in