Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Perception quizlet
Perception quizlet
David Hume on the mind and the senses
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Perception quizlet
This statement relates to the problem of perception; and how one cannot perceive an absolute and true reality, without the interference of filters of knowledge. It defines the ongoing search for the absolute truth. Empiricist David Hume felt that, “all the materials of thinking -- perceptions -- are derived either from sensation or from reflection”, and thus all one (thinks one) sees, touches, tastes, hears and smells and what is mentally reflected upon, contributes to a constructed reality. However at the same time, empiricism is limited by its subjectivity, as senses can be deluded or incomplete, and one’s reflection upon one’s senses may be different from somebody else’s. The circumstances of one’s own data collection and sensual perception can lead to misinformation. Thus one’s sensual perception of the world may be flawed. However, what about pre-sensual data? Data is filtered even before it is sensed. This is done by the sources of knowledge that one accumulates data from. Thus, not just internal filters (the filters that have to …show more content…
Psychostimulant and hallucinogenic drugs can alter the brain’s mechanics and the way one interprets information. Methamphetamines for example, which are a potent stimulant, create a profound sense of euphoria in the consumer. It does this by releasing dopamine and other neurotransmitters from vesicles in the brain, into the central nervous system, changing the way one processes and interprets data. Thus, as a reductionist would argue, how can one perceive a subjective reality close to the real objective reality, when one’s perception can be determined by simple chemical reactions in the human brain? Can the chemistry of one’s brain be controlled? Even without drugs, at any point in time, there are millions of neurons co-ordinating in one’s central nervous system, all with the possibility of purging an
Hume was an empiricist and a skeptic who believes in mainly the same ideals as Berkeley does, minus Berkeley’s belief in God, and looks more closely at the relations between experience and cause effect. Hume’s epistemological argument is that casual
Hume argues that perception can be divided into two types: impressions and ideas. He states that impressions are our first-hand perception, using all of our senses and emotions to experience them (Hume 2012, 8). For example, an impression of a sensation would be experiencing pain and an impression of reflection would be experiencing anger. Hume states that an idea is thinking about an impression. You cannot use your senses to experience the sensation or emotion, you are just simply reflecting on your experience (Hume 2007, 13). For example, thinking about the pain you felt when you stubbed your toe or thinking about how angry you felt when your football team lost. Hume argues that our thought is limited. He argues that when we imagine things such as an orange sea, we are simply joining two consistent ideas together. Hume argues that ‘all our ideas or more feeble perceptions are copies of our impressions or more lively ones’ (Hume 2007, 13). This is called the Copy Principle.
David Hume makes a strong affirmation in section IV of an Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. Hume states, "I shall venture to affirm as a general proposition, which admits of no exception, that the knowledge of this relation is not, in any instance attained by reasonings a priori; but entirely from experience." In this statement, when discussing "knowledge of this relation," Hume is referring to the relation between cause and effect. This argument can easily be dismissed as skeptical, for it puts all knowledge of this sort in doubt. However, Hume does not hastily doubt that this knowledge is not a priori, as a skeptic would. Instead Hume offers a sound argument as to why cause and effect knowledge can not be a priori, and thus his argument is not skeptical at all.
In An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding by David Hume, the idea of miracles is introduced. Hume’s argument is that there is no rational reason for human beings to believe in miracles, and that it is wrong to have miracles as the building blocks for religion. It is because the general notion of miracles come from the statement of others who claim to have seen them, Hume believes that there is no way to prove that those accounts are accurate, because they were not experienced first-hand. In order to believe a miracle, the evidence should be concrete, and something irrefutable. When there is any sort of doubt to a miracle, Hume says that any evidence that can be contrary to the proof of a miracle is merely evidence that the miracle did not happen, and it should be disproved. The only way a miracle can be proven is from the testimony of the person who had witnessed it, while any evidence against the miracle is something that defies the laws of nature. It falls upon the reputation of the witness to prove whether or not he or she actually observed a miracle, because a miracle can only be plausible when it is more likely than the opposing laws of nature. Hume’s reasoning in favour of miracles being insufficient events are also explanations as to why he believes miracles are not probable. First is the idea that human beings are not honest enough to be able to have possibly witnessed a miracle. Next is that human beings want to believe in the supernatural, and that desire allows us to believe in things that could never happen, simply because it would be wonderful and fantastical if that miracle actually did occur. Thirdly, the people who usually report sightings of a miracle are those who are uncivilized, or unsophisticated, so they ...
Semantics, in Hume’s mind, is the reason for the dispute between free will and determinism. In short, Hume believed that differences in the definitions of liberty and necessity cause people to choose sides, when, in actuality, both sides can be correct. In addition to this mutual inclusivity, Hume also believed that the common definitions of liberty and necessity coincide, a view that eventually led him to look to redefine liberty and necessity in order to demonstrate that both undoubtedly exist together in our world.
Every day we come across causal notions. Causality is the relationship between something and another and when the first event is a cause, it doesn’t just simply happen before the effect, it produces it. For instance, releasing the pen caused the pen to fall. As an empiricist, David Hume claims that all knowledge is based on experience, either on perception or thought. He defines causality in two ways in which his commitment to empiricism had got him to these conclusions. The first definition of cause is the object’s relation to another object in contiguity; the second is the relation between the object and our minds. First he says that all perceptions are divided into two categories; they are either impressions or ideas. Impressions are derived
Megan Darnley PHIL-283 May 5, 2014 Compatibilism and Hume. The choices an individual makes are often believed to be by their own doing; there is nothing forcing one action to be done in lieu of another, and the responsibility of one’s actions is on him alone. This idea of Free Will, supported by libertarians and is the belief one is entirely responsible for their own actions, is challenged by necessity, otherwise known as determinism. Those championing determinism argue every action and event is because of some prior cause.
Man takes note of the consequences his actions have, and form his habits accordingly. Impressions are more lively and forcible due to experiencing an action, while ides/thoughts are less forcible and less lively because they are only reflections and only thinking of an action. Hume explains this in, “Impression, then, I mean all our more lively perceptions…Love, or hate, see, or feel...and impressions are distinguished from ideas, which are the less lively perceptions.” Hume also explains in the next quote explains that impressions or sense are superior to ideas alone, “…all our ideas or more feeble perceptions are copies of our impressions or more lively ones…first, when we analyze our thoughts or ideas… they resolve themselves into such simple ideas as were copied from a precedent feeling or sentiment.”
The most commonly abused substances are Nicotine, Inhalants, Alcohol, Cocaine, Amphetamines, Prescription medications, Heroin, Ecstasy and Marijuana. 1a(National Institute on Drug Abuse, 2011) Initially, a person may find themselves using substances voluntarily and with confidence that they will be able to dictate their personal use. However, over the period of time that drug use is repeated, changes are taking place throughout the brain, whether it is functionally or structurally. Drugs contain chemicals that enter the communication system of the brain and disturb the way in which nerve cells would typically send, receive, and process information. The chemicals within these drugs will cause a disruption to the communication system by either imitating the brain’s natural chemical messengers or by over-stimulating the brains “reward system” by sending mass amounts of dopamine. As an individual prolongs his or her use of these substances, they may develop an addiction.
Cause and effect is a tool used to link happenings together and create some sort of explanation. Hume lists the “three principles of connexion among ideas” to show the different ways ideas can be associated with one another (14). The principles are resemblance, contiguity, and cause and effect. The focus of much of An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding falls upon the third listed principle. In Section I, Hume emphasizes the need to uncover the truths about the human mind, even though the process may be strenuous and fatiguing. While the principle of cause and effect is something utilized so often, Hume claims that what we conclude through this process cannot be attributed to reason or understanding and instead must be attributed to custom of habit.
In Appendix I., Concerning Moral Sentiment, David Hume looks to find a place in morality for reason, and sentiment. Through, five principles he ultimately concludes that reason has no place within the concept of morality, but rather is something that can only assist sentiment in matters concerning morality. And while reason can be true or false, those truths or falsities apply to facts, not to morality. He then argues morals are the direct result of sentiment, or the inner feeling within a human being. These sentiments are what intrinsically drive and thus create morality within a being. Sentiments such as beauty, revenge, pleasure, pain, create moral motivation, and action, and are immune to falsity and truth. They are the foundation for which morals are built, and exist themselves apart from any reasoning. Thesis: In moral motivation, the role of sentiment is to drive an intrinsically instilled presence within us to examine what we would deem a moral act or an immoral act, and act accordingly, and accurately upon the sentiments that apply. These sentiments may be assisted by reasons, but the reason alone does not drive us to do what we would feel necessary. They can only guide us towards the final result of moral motivation which (by now it’s painfully clear) is sentiment.
Hume uses senses, like Descartes, to find the truth in life. By using the senses he states that all contents of the mind come from experience. This leads to the mind having an unbound potential since all the contents are lead by experiences. The mind is made up two parts impressions and ideas. Impressions are the immediate data of the experience. For example, when someone drops a book on the desk and you hear a loud sound. The sight of the book dropping and hitting the desk is registered by an individual’s senses- sight, sound, feeling. Hume believes there are two types of impressions, original and secondary impressions. Original impressions are based on the senses,
The altered states of consciousness produced by drugs presents an all-to-common phenomenon in today’s society. Whether the desired sensation comes in the form of energy, a means of relaxation, or pain reduction, many people go to great lengths and present their bodies to threatening conditions in order to achieve this euphoric “high.” Unfortunately, the use of these drugs very often comes with dangerous side effects that users must learn to manage with for the rest of their life. According to neuroscientists, our entire conscious existence bases itself off of the lighting-fast reactions occurring in our nervous system (Nichols, 2012). Therefore, changing these neurological reactions can permanently effect our conscious being (Blatter, 2012). The physical and neurological effects from the use and abuse of stimulants, sedatives, hallucinogens, organic solvents, and athletic performance enhancing drugs will be discussed in order to better comprehend why certain individuals expose themselves to such dangerous materials with seemingly no regard to the permanent consequences associated with such actions.
In this essay Hume creates the true judges who are required to have: delicacy of taste, practice in a specific art of taste, be free from prejudice in their determinations, and good sense to guide their judgments. In Hume’s view the judges allow for reasonable critiques of objects. Hume also pointed out that taste is not merely an opinion but has some physical quality which can be proved. So taste is not a sentiment but a determination. What was inconsistent in the triad of commonly held belief was that all taste is equal and so Hume replaced the faulty assumption with the true judges who can guide society’s sentiments.
David Hume, following this line of thinking, begins by distinguishing the contents of human experience (which is ultimately reducible to perceptions) into: a) impressions and b) ideas.