ipl-logo

Enquiry David Hume Analysis

1435 Words6 Pages

David Hume, a highly influential Scottish empiricist philosopher and historian in the 18th century, is well known in philosophy for his Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, in which he discusses many philosophical matters, including epistemology, moral theory, miracles, free will and determinism. Hume follows the arguments regarding these topics wherever they lead without hesitation, resulting in many disturbing, but well-grounded conclusions. In Section IV of the Enquiry, Hume makes several claims: all of our reasonings concerning matters of fact are derived from cause and effect, all knowledge of cause and effect is based on experience, and any reasonings based on cause and effect depend on the assumption that the future will resemble …show more content…

One ball moves towards the other and strikes it, and then the second ball starts moving. One could know nothing regarding what that second Billiard-ball would do without consulting prior experience. A multitude of speculations could be put forth, all of which would be equally conceivable and therefore possible, which is of importance considering this is a matter of reasonings a …show more content…

Consider the following question: how does one know that the sun will rise tomorrow? Well, he might think that (1) in the past, the sun has always risen, and that (2) the future will resemble the past; therefore, the sun will rise tomorrow. However, how is the second premise justified? If he attempts to justify the claim that the future will resemble the past, then he must reason that (1) in the past, the then futures resembled the then past, and that (2) the future will resemble the past; therefore, the future will resemble the past. This reasoning blatantly begs the question by assuming what it aims to prove, and clearly shows that any argument that uses past experience to justify a claim about future matters must commit this same offense. One counter-argument that might be raised is that one could know with certainty that the sun will rise based on the mechanics of the solar system, as these statements are based on scientific endeavors. However, this counter-argument would fail within the context of this discussion, because even scientific endeavors would beg the question by asserting the principle of induction. Therefore, we may also conclude that scientific knowledge about the future cannot be certain, and only probable at best. Hume’s reasonings are consistent with strict empiricism, however his conclusion has some further implications. Since we may only think of impressions

Show More
Related
3370 Words | 14 Pages

In Dialogues concerning Natural religion Hume explores whether or not faith is rational. as a result of Hume is AN philosopher (i.e. somebody WHO thinks that every one information comes through experience), he thinks that a belief is rational given that it's sufficiently supported by experiential proof. therefore the question is absolutely, is there enough proof within the world to permit North American country to infer AN infinitely sensible, wise, powerful, excellent God? Hume doesn't raise whether or not we are able to rationally prove that God exists, however rather whether or not we are able to rationally return to any conclusions regarding God's nature. He asserts that the primary question is on the far side doubt; the latter is ab initio undecided.

Read More
802 Words | 4 Pages

Again premise three says ‘Generally, when effects resemble each other, their causes do as well’. In Hume’s objection it says if two things are exactly alike, then they are general caused by things that are exactly alike. The world is not exactly like a machine though, some parts may be comparable but there are immense differences. One example from class was a crater created by a bomb and a crater created by a meteorite. Another example is a forest fire; it could be created by a lighting strike or by human fault.

Read More
1006 Words | 5 Pages

The role of chance also poses a challenge to Hume's compatibilist position. It is possible that certain events or conditions that are outside of our control, such as natural disasters or genetic predispositions, can significantly influence our actions. This raises the question of whether we can truly be said to have free will if chance plays such a significant role in deciding our

Read More
230 Words | 1 Pages

Hume’s argument against induction is that “only meaningful propositions are relations of idea and matter of fact”. This meaning that the claim must be priori or a posteriori. However, Hume contradicts himself because his own argument does not meet his own criteria of a meaningful proposition. This is because his statement is not a relation of ideas or a matter of fact. The grue-problem is almost like predicting what will happen in the future based on what happened in the past.

Read More
177 Words | 1 Pages

Hume divides reasoning into two parts: demonstrative reasoning and causal reasoning. Demonstrative reasoning is abstract relations among different ideas. Causal reasoning are the relations among objects that we get from experience. Lastly, the will is defined in Humes Treatise, book 2, part 3, section 1 as "the

Read More
471 Words | 2 Pages

In the movie 12 Angry Men it showed many examples of Hume’s ideas such as skepticism, pluralism, relativism, and reasonable doubt. First let me explain what skepticism is, skepticism doubts the validation of knowledge or particular subject. Pluralism is the position that there are many different kinds of belief—but not all just as good as any other. Relativism is when the position that each belief is just as good as any other, since all beliefs are viewpoint dependent. Reasonable doubt is lack of proof that prevents a judge or jury to convict a defendant for the charged crime.

Read More
301 Words | 2 Pages

The original problem of induction concerns the justification of inductive inference. Hume maintains that it is the past regularity which establishes a habit that makes prediction happen. Goodman thinks Hume grasp the essence of the problem but also points out that not all regularity can form a habit to guide the prediction. The regularity which Hume refers to is only the generalization of evidence statement of something, not everything.

Read More
1251 Words | 6 Pages

I think that Hume’s predictions would be much better understood and clear if he had been more precise with his description. I agree that we have to find a way to distinguish hypotheses from one another in order to confirm them if they are law

Read More
868 Words | 4 Pages

Including the fact that our ideas were usually copies of impressions that occurred some time in our lives, Hume’s stated “There are no ideas, which occur in metaphysics, more obscure and uncertain, than those of power, force, energy or necessary connexion, of which it is every moment necessary for us to treat in all our disquisition.” (page

Read More
403 Words | 2 Pages

Since memory is not an original state but derived an impression, something similar happens with fantasy about the future. "By the term impression I mean it, all our more lively perceptions cuand hear or see or palpate or love and hate or desire or want And impressions are distinguished from ideas -. They are the less lively perceptions that are conscious when we reflect on any of those sensations or movements above "Enquiry Concerning Human understanding, Hume Hume will add that both ideas and impressions can be complex or simple your time as will decompose or not. In sínteis, for Hume, all our knowledge derived directly ora, ora indirect impressions. Even the most complex ideas, at least those at first examination, it seems more remote from the sensitivity.

Read More
1934 Words | 8 Pages

Immanuel Kant (from here on referred to as Kant) raises the claim that without experience one cannot have knowledge as experience is the first manner in which minds are awoken and triggered to begin functioning. Thus it is agreed, at some basic level, that all knowledge initially comes from experience and we can see this explicitly expressed in David Hume’s Treatise of Human Nature when he discusses Impressions and Ideas , saying that all knowledge can be causally traced back to some form of impression or experience. However, as much as it may seem like Hume and Kant are in total agreement, Kant differs slightly in his belief of what knowledge is by firmly stating that, “though all our knowledge begins with experience, it does not follow that

Read More
411 Words | 2 Pages

Hume, however, says that it doesn't tell us what happens in the future. So, he concludes that we can't always think that inductive reasoning, are good ones because we just can’t know they will hold as true in the

Read More
589 Words | 3 Pages

David Hume, one of the greatest philosophical thinkers of all time once wrote that our conclusions about matters of fact beyond observation and memory are not founded on reason. By this I take Hume to mean that we cannot obtain our knowledge of cause and effect by reasoning a priori, rather it arises from our experience. Another philosophical great, Thomas Reid, elaborates on this idea with his concept of the first principles of common sense. In the remainder of this paper I will be arguing that it is impossible to avoid Hume’s skepticism about the role of reason in our conclusion on matters of fact beyond current observation and memory by taking the principle of uniformity of nature to be a first principle of common sense. I will then explain why this is my belief and lastly I will provide what I consider to be Hume’s best response to my conclusion.

Read More
1404 Words | 6 Pages

Hume on the other hand can only confirm what has already happened, being that is the most truthful and logical

Read More
1172 Words | 5 Pages

David Hume is a famous Scottish philosopher who was very popular in 18s. He developed many theorical principles such as empiricism or naturalism, and one of his most popular among his works is so called “the radical skepticism of induction”. The skepticism is considered by Hume as one of significant issue towards the problem of induction in the history world of philosophy. David claimed that human had no innate ideas, all knowledge they had earned from their experience at the same time, inductive reasoning and beliefs in causality were not justified logically, however human’s beliefs in causality and induction derived from their custom as well as mental habit.

Read More

More about Enquiry David Hume Analysis

Related Topics

Open Document