Chapter 11 The Skeptic: David Hume
3. What is Locke’s “Egocentric Predicament?';
The Egocentric Predicament is a problem associated with our ideas and how we perceive the world. Locke believes all knowledge come from personal ideas; these ideas are based upon our perception of the world. However, if we only see the world based on our own ideas how can there be any external or objective world. This begs questions similar to; can I really know an objective world exists? If there is no external world do any other minds –or ideas- other than my own exist? How can we ever test reality if it is our own mental construction? Locke concludes that we do have some knowing in relation to the subjective and objective reality that they do exist, but that we do not have a clear idea between one and of the other.
7. Why does Hume draw a distinction between “facts'; and “values';?
Hume draws this distinction in recognizing further our own subjective and objective world. In this, through our own personal experience we associate certain facts with moral judgments and values. For example, there may be the fact that the sun will rise tomorrow. However, we place a judgment whether we dislike or like the sun rising tomorrow. Hume has merely recognized the distinction between the fact (sun) and values (likes/dislikes) of the sun. Hume’s link between facts and values was a push to further understand moral philosophy and our understanding of it.
8. What is the “empirical criterion of meaning';?
It states that meaningful ideas can be traced to sense experience (impressions). This relates to us having to question the very things we may believe are true. We may explore the idea of fate and conclude based upon experience that fate does not exist. What impressions do we have that fate exist? This causes us to look closely at the idea of fate because nothing from our experience may, or may not match fate to our experience of it. We must ask the question whether there are any impressions to sense experience regarding Fate, if we cannot find any valid impressions it would be worthless or meaningless utterances.
9. What does Hume have to say about the limits of science and theology?
In science, Hume recognized a problem with scientific causality. He saw science as being based on inductive reasoning, which results in generalized rules or principles.
One of Locke’s largest points is "All ideas come from sensation or reflection” (Locke 101). He thinks that man is completely blank when they are born and that their basic senses are what gives them knowledge. Locke states, “Let us then suppose the mind to be, as we say, white paper” (Locke 101). Locke is basically saying that human nature is like a blank slate, and how men experience life in their own ways is what makes them good or evil. Overall, Locke believes that any and all knowledge is only gained through life
However, reviewing Berkeley’s ideals on the matter, Hume seems to have more of an epistemological standpoint. Hume believes that everything that we have knowledge of is because of past experience. Everything that we know up to this point is because we have observed and learned from the past. Although everything is also the way it is because of naturalism and causation, every cause and effect that has taken place in history has been interfered with by humans and their knowledge. Berkeley believes that the world is as we perceive it to be, as does Hume. For people to believe the world to be a certain way must come from a certain ideal that we have in mind to be true. In other words, we have an idea of what the world should look like now and what it may look like in the future based off of what the past has looked like and what it is
Locke explains, “Attention and repetition help much to the fixing any ideas in the memory. But those which naturally at first make the deepest and most lasting impressions, are those which are accompanied with pleasure or pain” (8). The majority of classrooms use the former method, so their assistance to students is lessened. The idea that students learn best through sensory or reflective experience is why, as Locke demonstrates, education can be ineffective in teaching students. I agree that much of what a student learns will never be applied, and yet there are some things, such as learning how to read, that students can more effectively be taught through a teacher rather than through
First, Hume shows how necessity is present in our lives. He points out that we exist in an orderly and logical world, and that many events that we perceive to be the result of another action are actually determined by logical laws of nature. Hume argues that the exactness of these effects stems solely from the natural forces responsible for guiding our lives, and also that we falsely assume causal relationships between events because of our limited viewpoint.
Hume left a very controversial but necessary philosophy behind. His skeptical and empirical take on philosophy was something which was critically needed in a rationally dominated era of philosophy. His philosophy makes many excellent points while some are too radical. Kant, who was greatly influenced by Hume’s work is one of the most resourceful and innovative philosophers. He uses Hume’s work as a foundation to build a balanced philosophy taking the key components of both rational and Humean philosophies while tying in loose ends through his own theories such as a synthetic a priori. Kant’s philosophy clears up, for many, Hume’s loose ends as well as overcoming some of Hume’s more radical ideas. Hume’s influences on Kant allow Kant to create a modern viewpoint and definition on how metaphysics, a priori knowledge and human understanding is perceived.
John Locke possesses many characteristics of an idealist. However, he also believes that we were created by God and that we our morally obligated to preserve ourselves and the rest of humankind. How he can come to this conclusion when he believes we have no pre-knowledge of anything is somewhat disturbing. If we only perceive things with our senses, or though our own mind reflection how is this logic possible? It seems to be a contradiction in th...
Locke feels that we do not have any innate ideas. Then the question arises of
Before Hume can begin to explain what morality is, he lays down a foundation of logic to build on by clarifying what he thinks the mind is. Hume states that the facts the mind sees are just the perceptions we have of things around us, such as color, sound, and heat (Hume, 215). These perceptions can be divided into the two categories of ideas and impressions (215). Both of these categories rely on reason to identify and explain what is observed and inferred. However, neither one of these sufficiently explains morality, for to Hume, morals “. . .excite passions, and produce or prevent actions” (216)....
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.
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,
However, when it comes to the ultimate deciding factor of morality for Hume, it is derived from a sentiment or feeling, as he later argues, “There is the final judgment, which renders morality an active principle, and makes virtue our happiness, and vice our misery. This final moral conclusion depends on some internal sense or feeling that nature has made universal in the whole species; for only a feeling could have an influence such as I have described” (Hume 3). In light of this quote, it can be seen that, while Hume does not completely dismiss reason, as he states that reason works in part with sentiment in order to guide someone’s morals, his position on morality resonates best with that of the moral sense theory as he bases morals on sentiments rather than reason. Moreover, according to Hume, “morality can be found within. When you observe an immoral act, you do not find any right or wrong about the situation when you consider only the objects involved in the act. Only when you turn to your reflexion into your own breast, and find a sentiment of disapprobation will you find a right or wrong about the situation” (Hume 72). This statement alone shows us that Hume
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 qualities which can be proved. So taste is not a sentiment, but a determination. What was inconsistent in the triad of commonly held beliefs was that all taste is equal and so Hume replaced the faulty assumption with the true judges who can guide society’s sentiments.
It was at the beginning of my vacation that I realised the world was not all it appeared to be. Up until now, I had always accepted that the world was a collection of material objects independent of myself. As I sit in the airport lounge waiting for my flight, it now seems that everything I see is nothing more than a series of images projected in my mind. The lounge is like a stage set and people, like characters in a film, pass by and disappear. The world, or rather my world, is simply that which exists in my mind, but has no material existence in my mind. Does that mean that the objects of the world have no existence outside my mind?
Impressions are given sensations that arise from "unknown causes". Remember that what we know are our impressions, according to this trend. Whether there is something that corresponds to these impressions is unknown, for we don't know real being, we know impressions (a la Descartes).
John Locke believed that the mind was a blank slate, shaped by experience, and the two sources of all our ideas were sensations and reflections. Within his theory of identity, Locke separated the idea of a substance, an organism, and a person; each determined by different criteria. The identity of a substance consists in its matter. For example: a mass of atoms is the same throughout time so long as it retains the same atoms, regardless of arrangement. He does not tie t...