Hume, David

Average customer rating:

philosophy as social science
Misadvertised/mis-linked to different edition
A thought-provoking book
Great Principles on Understanding, Emotions, & Morals
Oxford's edition by the Nortons is the only one to buy

A Treatise of Human Nature
David Hume
Manufacturer: Oxford University Press, USA
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

Consciousness & Thought | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Modern | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Look Inside Nonfiction Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books
Similar Items:

An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding (Oxford Philosophical Texts)
An Essay Concerning Human Understanding
An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals
Descartes: Meditations on First Philosophy: With Selections from the Objections and Replies (Cambridge Texts in the History of Philosophy)
Kant: Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (Cambridge Texts in the History of Philosophy)

ASIN: 0198245882

Book Description

A Treatise of Human Nature (1739-40) is Hume's comprehensive attempt to base philosophy on an observationally grounded study of human nature. The text explains how we form such concepts as cause and effect, external existence, and personal identity, and to form beliefs in the entities represented by these concepts. It then offers an account of the passions, explains freedom and necessity as they apply to human choices and actions, and concludes with an explanation of how we distinguish between virtue and vice and of the different kinds of virtue. Also included in this volume is Hume's abstract of the Treatise, which outlines his core argument regarding our conception of, and belief in, cause and effect.

Download Description

It is therefore certain, that the imagination reaches a minimum, and may raise up to itself an idea, of which it cannot conceive any sub-division, and which cannot be diminished without a total annihilation. When you tell me of the thousandth and ten thousandth part of a grain of sand, I have a, distinct idea of these numbers and of their different proportions; but the images, which I form in my mind to represent the things themselves, are nothing different from each other, nor inferior to that image, by which I represent the grain of sand itself, which is supposed so vastly to exceed them. What consists of parts is distinguishable into them, and what is distinguishable is separable. But whatever we may imagine of the thing, the idea of a grain of sand is not distinguishable, nor separable into twenty, much less into a thousand, ten thousand, or an infinite number of different ideas.

Customer Reviews:

philosophy as social science.......2006-11-25

Hume's `Treatise on Human Nature', the book, which, in the report of the author "fell stillborn from the press", and yet remains of continuing interest to us four centuries hence, is, among all else, the primordial exposition of a systematic psychology in the West. Hume's elevation of "the passions" ("Reason is and ought only to be the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office than to serve and obey them.") and centralization of intentionality in the study of ourselves, are as significant contributions to the modern turn, more specifically, the transition to late modernity, as are the fruits of his more notorious skeptical detachment and trenchant empiricism and naturalism. Of all the so-called classical empiricists, none prefigures those characteristically late modern naturalist, positivist, analytic, and, to an extent, pragmatist, and even (surprisingly) existentialist outlooks as clearly as Hume. Also, the profound impact of Hume, the social scientist, on social organization and social forms is indisputable. In this work, Hume fathers the concept of rule utilitarianism (he was the original modern occidental utilitarian), the most influential articulation of which is found in the U.S. Constitution, established little more than a decade after his death in 1776.

The celebrated Selby-Bigge/Nidditch edition is, for the general reader or undergraduate, at under $5, still a terrific value. Why? First and foremost, the Index: among the best ever! Hume is complex. While his initial presentation is often (intentionally, I'd say) disarmingly direct, the justifications for and commentary on the ramifications of his assertions often engender and weave into vast and subtle conceptual patterns, which meander over a 662 page corpus of text. The index locates and situates the basic concepts and allows the individual to structure the reading. Incredibly useful -- as one may not wish to read all of Hume or all of Hume at once! More likely, the prospective reader is searching for a very specific concept or issue, and the precise and comprehensive Index makes penetration of what is in many places a difficult and arcane text quite doable.

Misadvertised/mis-linked to different edition.......2006-02-24

This was not the edition I wanted, as follows: I initially found the desired edition, including a photo of the cover, followed the links for available copies, including this one which I purchased (which, BTW, did not have a photo of cover, but I assumed it was same edition as on the initial page). Was dismayed to receive this different edition. It matters because it was for a friend's college course. Professors often reference pages in the assigned edition, which do not correspond to another edition's page numbering. Please minimize such confusion by more accurate advertising (include a cover photo on every linked page, to ensure it matches the initial one) or more accurate linking--i.e. don't show a specific search result but then link to other books that are not the same one, unless again, there are cover photos or other info displayed to distinguish them.

A thought-provoking book.......2005-04-03

Another book I read while getting my BA in Philosophy at UCLA. Hume, and not Freud, is sometimes credited with being the father of modern Psychology. Read this book, and you'll understand why.

Great Principles on Understanding, Emotions, & Morals.......2005-03-23

According to David Hume, the mind and body are integral units, with one unable to exist or operate without the other. There are no "innate" ideas, nor logically a priori knowledge, only sense impressions that arise out of direct experience of the five senses and concomitant sense ideas that arise in the imagination. The imagination (i.e., mind) then makes associations. From these various sense impressions and ideas, the imagination commingles the ideas with inferences from resemblance, contiguity, and causality. Examples: The imagination relates one sense impression and its concomitant sense idea with another when they share similar characteristics or resemble one another, such as in shape, height, weight, distance, proportion, color, etc. The imagination associates one sense impression and its concomitant sense idea with another when they are in close contiguity, such as proximity in time, place, situation, connection, succession, etc. Lastly, the imagination associates one sense impression and its concomitant sense idea with another when there appears to be some cause and effect, for example when one turns on a wall switch, and a light appears, or one turns a key in an ignition, and a car starts, or other causal inferences. Only from the sense ideas and impressions, commingled with the imagination's inferences of resemblance, contiguity, and causality, can any opinion or belief or knowledge be known. The difference between an opinion, belief, or knowledge is only one of degree, namely, how strong, convincingly, and lively (Hume uses the word "vivacity") the senses, their ideas, and the inferences work themselves out in the imagination. Generally, knowledge is reserved only for the strongest of degrees of inference, such as those verifiable and not refutable by inferential (cf., deductive) logic or experimentation; all else is either opinion or belief. But no knowledge, no matter how often repeated and examined inductively, is absolute; all knowledge, like opinion and belief, is contingent. For "absolute" knowledge once held the earth to be flat, to be the center of the universe, and non-rotating. Even Einstein's Theory of Relativity had to be revised by a Special Theory of Relativity. We still don't understand how the universe can be "full" and still "expanding," yet both are true (so far!). Only knowledge, belief, and opinion derived from the senses, their ideas, and imaginative inferences have merit; all other "imaginations," such as the deductive existence of a "God" or Supreme Being, absolute morals, or correct emotions, are merely speculative imaginations, and ultimately all such speculation leads to nothing more than myth or superstition, false dogmas, and irrational beliefs.

The passions, better known as either sensations or emotions, are derived from sense experience as well and are derived from the other sense impressions and sense ideas. Sensations are those experiences that arise within the imagination itself, based on something the body itself produces, such as hunger, pain, thirst, pleasure, and uneasiness. Emotions are those experiences that arise from the sensations and sense impressions and their concomitant sense ideas. The four principle emotions are: (1) Pride, and its opposite (2) Humility; (3) Love, and its opposite (4) Hatred. Pride and Love are desirable, whereas Humility and Hatred are undesirable. All other emotions are derived from, or are in one degree or another, always reducible to these four. Beauty, for example, is the love of something well-figured and loved for its own sake, while ugliness is something disfigured or ill-figured and hated. Anger is a form of hatred, while happiness is a form of either Pride or Love or both. Jealousy is a form of hatred (of another), while compassion is a form of Love. All emotions, when considered in their origins, have these four emotions as their foundation; it's all a matter of degree and kind.

There is no absolute morality; no moral principle can be deductively arrived at (except to be pure speculation). Morals can only be inferred from the two principles of (1) maximize pleasure and (2) avoid pain. These principles are natural inclinations of the body itself, not derived from logic or reason (i.e., speculation), but by verifiable experimentation, inferred from experience itself, especially the emotions of pride, humility, love, and hatred. We like to be loved, we despise to be hated, so we do those things that maximize these natural inclinations, because we want pleasure and to avoid pain, and they alone are what count as "moral." All virtue is that which brings us pleasure; all vice is that which brings us pain. For example, we are just to one another, not because we ought to be, but because we desire that being just toward others will merit other's affection, whereas being unjust will cause others to avoid us; the first is pleasurable, the latter is painful. We respect each other's property because it brings us mutual pleasure to enjoy the fruits of our own labor, whereas it causes us pain to have our property taken from us. The origin of government is from the experience where doing things socially imparts pleasure, whereas doing things in isolation causes pain. No one is an island, is true. Warding off an enemy as an individual forces the individual to bear all the weight, thus causing pain. Fighting the enemy together fosters our mutual interests (i.e., pleasure), and allows all to participate in the fruits of individual endeavors. We benefit from mutual cooperation, which good government ought to foster, whereas we lose and experience pain when we try to fight all battles by our own selves. There really is benefit in "numbers," to having more people in favor of the things we collectively sponsor and work hard for, and are opposed to those things that oppress. Showing how "each person benefits by collective effort" is how to operate good government; showing "how each person loses by individual effort alone" is another good reason for government. Government's sole function and purpose is to advance the collective cooperation, wherein each individual ultimately flourishes (and brings pleasure).

Oxford's edition by the Nortons is the only one to buy.......2004-11-24

Since Hume's Treatise first appeared in 1739-1740, several distinct editions have been published. While most of these are fine for casual use, the Oxford University Press edition, recently prepared by David and Mary Norton, stands alone as an outstanding scholarly achievement. Their edition, at present only available in the Oxford Philosophical Texts student edition, will within the next year or so also be available in a scholarly edition (Oxford's Clarendon Edition). These two versions have the same text of the Treatise. The difference between them lies in their introductions and annotations, which are suited to different sets of readers. Part of the value of both versions lies in these exceptional introductions and annotations. The other part, though, involves the Nortons' editing of the text of the Treatise itself, which, ironically, makes their edition more accurate than Hume's original. While the original edition of the Treatise was being printed, Hume instructed the printer to make changes to the text, and thus some first editions read differently than others. The Nortons have compared first-edition copies of the Treatise page by page to locate these changes. Pen in hand, Hume also scribbled other changes into several printed copies of the Treatise; the Nortons have accounted for those alterations as well. These are just two examples of many editorial tasks that have gone into making this the definitive edition of Hume's Treatise, the edition which will remain the standard for decades. Let me add a word regarding the critical comments that an anonymous amazon.com reviewer made about the Nortons' edition ("A reader", January 18, 2003). This reviewer's comments may be well-meaning, but I can say with confidence there is little substance to her/his objections. The edition has been widely hailed as a triumph by Hume scholars and scholarly reviewers, and the philosophy editors at Oxford University Press tell me they are completely delighted with the work.

The Cambridge Companion to Hume (Cambridge Companions to Philosophy)

Average customer rating:

Excellent Compendium
A Small Correction
A General Introduction to Hume's Philosophy

The Cambridge Companion to Hume (Cambridge Companions to Philosophy)

Manufacturer: Cambridge University Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

History & Surveys | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

History, 17th & 18th Century | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Modern | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Look Inside Nonfiction Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books

All Amazon Upgrade | Amazon Upgrade | Stores | Books

Nonfiction | Amazon Upgrade | Stores | Books

Qualifying Textbooks - Spring 2007 | Stores | Books
Similar Items:

The Cambridge Companion to Descartes (Cambridge Companions to Philosophy)
The Cambridge Companion to Kant (Cambridge Companions to Philosophy)
The Cambridge Companion to Locke (Cambridge Companions to Philosophy)
The Cambridge Companion to Aristotle (Cambridge Companions to Philosophy)
The Cambridge Companion to Nietzsche (Cambridge Companions to Philosophy)

ASIN: 0521387108

Amazon.com

David Hume's mother reportedly lamented, "Our Davie is a fine good-natured critter, but uncommon weak-minded." Perhaps she would have been comforted to know that today her son is widely considered to be the most important philosopher ever to have written in the English language. The Companion's 11 essays take the reader from Hume's precocious Treatise of Human Nature--published in 1739, when he was only 28--to the posthumously published Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, and cover not only the subjects central to Hume's philosophy but also his views on politics, economics, literary and aesthetic theory, and even history. As David Wootton's essay observes, the British Library catalog identifies Hume as "the historian"--"to the puzzlement," Wootton quips, "of generations of philosophers." Also included are Hume's two short autobiographies, written in his own inimitable style: he describes the unexcited reaction to his Treatise by saying that "it fell dead-born from the press, without reaching such distinction as even to excite a murmur among the zealots."

The contributors to the Companion are among the most respected contemporary Hume scholars; their essays are uniformly clear and accessible. Robert J. Fogelin's article on Hume's skepticism, Knud Haakonssen's article on Hume's political theory, and J.C.A. Gaskin's article on Hume's philosophy of religion are particularly worthwhile, as is the substantial bibliography. Although the Companion is not aimed at the specialist, neither is it for the philosophical novice--still, anyone interested in Hume's life and work would benefit from perusing it. --Glenn Branch

Book Description

David Hume is, arguably, the most important philosopher ever to have written in English. Although best known for his contributions to epistemology, metaphysics, and the philosophy of religion, Hume also made substantial and influential contributions to psychology and the philosophy of mind, ethics, the philosophy of science, political and economic theory, political and social history, and to a lesser extent, aesthetic and literary theory. All facets of Hume's output are discussed in this volume, the first genuinely comprehensive overview of his work. The picture that emerges is of a thinker, who, though critical to the point of skepticism, was nonetheless able to build on that skepticism a profoundly important, and still viable, constructive philosophy.

Customer Reviews:

Excellent Compendium.......2004-07-23

The goal of this collection of essays is to provide background and commentary of important aspects of the work of David Hume. The intent of this book is to provide guidance and context for individuals reading Hume. This book easily exceeds those goals. The authors are all well known experts on Hume and this book covers the whole spectrum of Hume's output from his seminal philosophical works through his essays and historical works. While this is an apparently diverse set of topics, important themes connect the essays. Several essays stress the 'positive' or constructive aspects of Hume's epistemology and theory of mind, an aspect of his thought that recurs strongly in his writings on moral, political, economic, and historical topics. Several essays stress Hume's uniform emphasis on a 'scientific' methodology in approaching many subjects. Overall, this volume gives a strong sense of the underlying unity of Hume's work. All of these essays are at least good. There are particularly good essays by Norton on Hume's work on morals, Hakonsson's on Hume's political theory, Fogelin on Hume's skepticism, Gaskin on Hume's criticism of religion,and an enlightening essay on Hume's work as a historian. The other essays are useful. The high quality of these essays makes this book valuable for a broad audience. It can be read profitably by individuals just exploring Hume and I suspect it would be equally useful for more experienced scholars and teachers.

A Small Correction.......2004-05-04

I have not read this book, though I know it belongs to a series whose productions are excellent and represent the latest scholarship. Having perused the list of scholars who are contributors, I expect the same will be true of this volume.

I only wish to comment on the advertising blurb. I believe that it was Hume's aunt (or great-aunt) who is credited with this quote and what she actually said was that little Davie was "uncommon wake-minded" (meaning unusually bright and curious) not "weak-minded". It is also quite clear that she did not approve of this trait in the young Hume. Many others will no doubt agree with her about this, but certainly no one will think that he was in any way weak-minded.

A General Introduction to Hume's Philosophy.......2001-05-24

The complex and often radical ideas formulated by Scotland's "Man of the Millenuim" are explained clearly and plainly in this companion without neglecting the more difficult issues that will concern students of philsophy. This book is particularly helpful in its discussion of Hume's scepticism and his views on morality and politics. It also provides a concise overview of Hume's empirical psychology.

Enquiries Concerning Human Understanding and Concerning the Principles of Morals

Average customer rating:

Hume at his best
A Classic Edition of Two Philosophical Masterworks
A must read! A great classic literary achievement .
Fascinating asymmetrical paradigmatically-oriented concept

Enquiries Concerning Human Understanding and Concerning the Principles of Morals
David Hume
Manufacturer: Oxford University Press, USA
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

Ethics & Morality | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Modern | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Look Inside History Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books

Look Inside Nonfiction Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books
Similar Items:

A Treatise of Human Nature
Critique of Pure Reason
An Essay Concerning Human Understanding
Essays: Moral, Political and Literary
The Federalist: with Letters of Brutus (Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought)

ASIN: 019824536X

Customer Reviews:

Hume at his best.......2005-10-10

David Hume was perhaps the leading light in the Empiricist movement in philosophy. Empiricism is seen in distinction from Rationalism, in that it doubts the viability of universal principles (rational or otherwise), and uses sense data as the basis of all knowledge - experience is the source of knowledge. Hume was a skeptic as well as empiricist, and had radical (for the time) atheist ideas that often got in the way of his professional advancement, but given his reliance on experience (and the kinds of experiences he had), his problem with much that was considered conventional was understandable.

Hume's major work, 'A Treatise of Human Nature', was not well received intially - according to Hume, 'it fell dead-born from the press'. Hume reworked the first part of this work in a more popular way for this text, which has become a standard, and perhaps the best introduction to Empiricism.

In a nutshell, the idea of empiricism is that experience teaches, and rules and understanding are derived from this. However, for Hume this wasn't sufficient. Just because billiard balls when striking always behave in a certain manner, or just because the sun always rose in the morning, there was no direct causal connection that could be automatically affirmed - we assume a necessary connection, but how can this be proved?

Hume's ideas impact not only metaphysics, but also epistemology and psychology. Hume develops empiricism to a point that empiricism is practically unsupportable (and it is in this regard that Kant sees this text as a very important piece, and works toward his synthesis of Empiricism and Rationalism). For Hume, empirical thought requires skepticism, but leaves it unresolved as far as what one then needs to accept with regard to reason and understanding. According to scholar Eric Steinberg, 'A view that pervades nearly all of Hume's philosophical writings is that both ancient and modern philosophers have been guilty of optimistic and exaggerated claims for the power of human reason.'

Some have seen Hume as presenting a fundamental mistrust of daily belief while recognising that we cannot escape from some sort of framework; others have seen Hume as working toward a more naturalist paradigm of human understanding. In fact, Hume is open to a number of different interpretations, and these different interpretations have been taken up by subsequent philosphers to develop areas of synthetic philosophical ideas, as well as further developments more directly out of Empiricism (such as Phenomenology).

This is in fact a rather short book, a mere 100 pages or so in many editions. As a primer for understanding Hume, the British Empiricists (who include Hobbes, Locke, and Berkeley), as well as the major philosphical concerns of the eighteenth century, this is a great text with which to start.

A Classic Edition of Two Philosophical Masterworks.......2004-05-27

Hume's Enquiries are more or less a repackaging of the material from Books I and III of his earlier A Treatise of Human Nature. Ever desirous of literary fame and dismayed by the lack of interest others had shown for his prior tome, Hume went back to the drawing board and attempted to present his philosophical system in a way that would be palatable to the reading public. We should feel fortunate that he did so. For, though the significant changes are in style and emphasis rather than substance, these books are a perfect introduction to Hume's thinking. And while the shorter form did require some not insignificant cutting, most of what you find in the earlier book is presented here in a simpler, more accessible manner. That's not to say that there is nothing new here; there is. In particular, he considers some religious subjects (i.e. miracles and immortality) that he was unwilling to broach in the earlier work.

The connecting thread here is an emphasis on grounding philosophical inquiry in an empirical account of human nature, and particularly of the human mind. The first Enquiry is an account of Hume's take on the implications of the classical empiricism he inherited from Locke and Berkeley. For Hume, as for the other classical empiricists, empiricism was primarily a psychological theory about the origin and content of our concepts. (So empiricism, Hume thought, is a crucial element of any plausible account of the human mind.) The central tenet of this theory is that our concepts are furnished by experience, which includes both sensory experience and introspection (i.e., the experience of our own mental states). And the empiricists also agreed about the way we can justify our beliefs. Some beliefs are true (or false) in virtue of the ideas they contained, and we can know their truth (or falsity) simply by thinking about them; other beliefs are true (or false) in virtue of how the external world is, and we can know their truth (or falsity) only by drawing on our experiences of the world. According to Hume, all substantial conclusions about the world fall into this second category. That is, the truth (or falsity) of all substantial claims about the existence and nature of things in the external world can be discovered only by checking those claims against the evidence of our senses.

Here we seem Hume wielding this philosophy of mind in order to adjudicate disputes in metaphysics and epistemology. Do you want to know whether something can be known? Then think about the concepts in which it is expressed. Could we come to know this by thinking about the meaning of our concepts? Could we come to know it by going and looking or doing certain empirical tests? If the answer to both these questions is no, then knowledge of this subject is an impossibility for us. Do you want to know whether some claim of the metaphysicians is true or whether it even makes sense? Consider the concepts they use to express their views. Is there any way you could reduce the content of this concept to some experience? If not, their claims are literally meaningless.

This interpretation of Hume's project downplays his skepticism and emphasizes his professed intentions to provide a positive account of the operation of the human mind that appealed to nothing beyond the evidence of our senses. According to proponents of this interpretation, Hume is most interested in a description of the operation of the human mind. He's describing what human nature allows us to know and what it doesn't allow us to know. Furthermore, he argues that our nature is such that, where it fails to provide us with the resources to acquire the knowledge we might want, it provides us with a natural habit of forming the right conclusions anyway. Even though our nature limits our knowledge of the world, it ensures that we possess the habits of mind needed to make our way in the world. Hume dubs all these habits of mind "custom."

And I think this naturalistic interpretation of Hume's project provides an entry into the views he defends in the Enquiry concerning the Principles of Morals. Again, it's possible to interpret Hume's project in moral philosophy as a skeptical one. The fact that he thinks morality is based in human sentiments show that he is, in some sense, a subjectivist about morality. He doesn't think there is any plausible account of our moral thinking as based on reason or empirical inquiry alone. Morality, then, is more a matter of feeling than a matter of thinking, observing, and reasoning. But, importantly, Hume doesn't think this is indicative of some problem with morality, and so he doesn't understand himself to be undermining ordinary morality. His aim is to expose the groundless pretensions of reason in order to make room for a wholly naturalistic account morality; it's not to show that morality doesn't have a firm basis. For he does not think that morality would ideally be based on reason and empirical evidence rather than sentiment. Rather, he thinks there is a sort of philosophical overreaching involved in trying to base morality on reason or empirical evidence as opposed to sentiment.

But what is the relevant sentiment? According to Hume, it is a general sort of benevolence, of concern for others. Our possessing such a feeling does not mean that we'll always set aside our own interest in the interest of others; nor does it mean that we are not largely self-interested. It does, however, mean that we're not wholly self-interested, as we are motivated to do (and not do) certain things even when they do not affect our own interests and desires. But what inspires these sentiments, and how exactly do they translate into moral judgments? Morality, Hume argues, is based on sentiments of approbation and disapprobation that are prompted by a recognition of the connection between human actions, dispositions, etc. and what is in the best interest of oneself and of mankind in general. What we take to be virtues, Hume argues, are those dispositions that lead a person to perform actions tending to promote his own happiness and the happiness of others, whereas vices are dispositions that do the opposite.

A must read! A great classic literary achievement ........1998-09-28

If sceptical thought has evolved since Socrates this book is the evidence. Hume perhaps sets the standard for all philosophical inquiry that is scholarly and brilliant. The subject matter I found most illuminating and delightful to read was on moral distinctions (right and wrong). This is serious stuff. If you take the time to understand Hume, you certainly will not be wasting your time.

Fascinating asymmetrical paradigmatically-oriented concept.......1998-07-25

Mr. Hume presents a psuedo-transient macro-realistically templable prescript for the acogitive development of pertinent systems within the spheres aforetoherein ascribed to the previously-defined source wherein the constructs devised to meet the needs of the specified systems or entities oriented within such a paradigm would be construed as a non-extant positable body of asubstantive text as pre-emptively pertinent to the essence of the text-body at hand thereupon wherein tofore.

An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding (Oxford Philosophical Texts)

Average customer rating:

Circular Reasoning.
Descartes' Ultimate Error
Hume at his best
A comment on one part of Hume 's classic
As Exciting and Thought-Provoking as Philosophy Gets

An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding (Oxford Philosophical Texts)
David Hume
Manufacturer: Oxford University Press, USA
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

Consciousness & Thought | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Epistemology | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

History & Surveys | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Metaphysics | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Modern | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Look Inside Nonfiction Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books

Qualifying Textbooks - Spring 2007 | Stores | Books
Similar Items:

An Essay Concerning Human Understanding
A Treatise of Human Nature
Descartes: Meditations on First Philosophy: With Selections from the Objections and Replies (Cambridge Texts in the History of Philosophy)
Meditations on First Philosophy: In Which the Existence of God and the Distinction of the Soul from the Body Are Demonstrated
Discourse on Method and Meditations on First Philosophy, 4th Ed.

ASIN: 0198752482

Book Description

Oxford Philosophical Texts Series Editor: John Cottingham The Oxford Philosophical Texts series consists of authoritative teaching editions of canonical texts in the history of philosophy from the ancient world down to modern times. Each volume provides a clear, well laid out text together with a comprehensive introduction by a leading specialist, giving the student detailed critical guidance on the intellectual context of the work and the structure and philosophical importance of the main arguments. Endnotes are supplied which provide further commentary on the arguments and explain unfamiliar references and terminology, and a full bibliography and index are also included. The series aims to build up a definitive corpus of key texts in the Western philosophical tradition, which will form a reliable and enduring resource for students and teachers alike. David Hume's aim in writing An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding (1748) was to introduce his philosophy to a European culture in which many educated people read original works of philosophy. He gives an elegant and accessible presentation of strikingly original and challenging views about the limited powers of human understanding, the attractions of scepticism, the compatibility of free will and determinism, and weaknesses in the foundations of religion. Hume's philosophy was highly controversial in the eighteenth century and remains so today. The text printed in this edition is that of the Clarendon critical edition of Hume's works. A substantial introduction by the editor explains the intellectual background to the work and surveys its main themes. The volume also includes detailed explanatory notes on the text, a glossary of terms, a full list of references, and a section of supplementary readings.

Download Description

Extracted from: Enquiries Concerning the Human Understanding, and Concerning the Principles of Morals, By David Hume. Reprinted from The Posthumous Edition of 1777, and Edited with Introduction, Comparative Tables of Contents, and Analytical Index by L.A. Selby-Bigge, M.A., Late Fellow of University College, Oxford.

Customer Reviews:

Circular Reasoning........2006-07-16

C. S. Lewis exposed the circular reasoning in Hume in the book "Miracles." David Hume was not a skeptic. He was a freemason and therefore a gnostic. He was only skeptical of nongnostic positions, such as Christianity. He was an apologist for gnosticism. He had blind faith allegiance to the masonic lodge and its creed.

His argument against miracles is his chief argument against Christianity, and it suffers from circular reasoning. Circular reasoning you exclaim? Yes. Hume argued that miracles violate uniform experience. However, if uniform experience is against mircales, then they cannot happen. Uniform experience is his presupposition. But, uniform experience is defined to exclude miracles. If they didn't happen, well, they didn't happen. This begs the question. I have a better argument than Lewis's. I would simply point out that pure logic cannot dispense with the empirical question of whether miracles happen. Afterall, mathematics is made up of tautologies. As such, mathematics or logic or any formal reasoning cannot have physical meaning. Pure logic, as Hume employs, cannot tell us anything about the world. Therein lies the sophistry. It boils down to the distinction between analytic statements and synthetic statements. Whether or not miracles happen depends not on logic, but on the existence of God who intervenes in human affairs. As the former atheist Antony Flew said, it is impossible to argue against the existence of God in light of the evidence of intelligent design of the universe.

If anyone went to the moon and found a house there that supplied oxygen, food and other human necessities, they wouldn't hesitate to posit a creator of that house. So why would anyone question the existence of God in light of this wonderful planet that supports our lives?

What is remarkable about him is how irrational he is. He possesses a flair for writing and shows great promise in reasoning. Yet, he sacrifices good reasoning for pushing his gnostic agenda. It's like a person who graduates from medical school who decides to murder patients, or a graduate from law school who chooses to rob banks. He tries to use reasoning to support irrational thought. Hume was a strange man. The engine is running, but there's no one behind the wheel.

Descartes' Ultimate Error.......2005-10-10

If one accepts the methodology of Descartes in applying scepticism to reason and the senses, in effect denying the existence of all things but a "thinking thing," two entailments are logically consequent: Either Berkeley's idealism or Hume's scepticism. I don't accept Descartes' starting point, so I find the entailments confused and incoherent. But if one does accept Descartes' starting point, then the two extremes must be heeded. If for no other reason than observing the absurdity of either man's conclusions, it is valuable to read both entailments. But in their confused process, both men bring certain salient features to light.

Hume accepts Descartes starting point, making it his own. But to Descartes method, he adds Pyrrhonist scepticism: That all reason leads to infinite regress, and that all sensations (or impressions) can not be trusted.

Hume begins with the conclusion that all sense perception is either an impression or idea. Even memory and imagination, two other faculties of the mind, are conflated into these two species of perceptions, as impressions. Their difference is one of degree (vivacity), not of kind. Hence, Hume is the author of what is known as the "Copy Principle." Instead of unmediated, direct perception through the ordinary senses, all perception is mediated by the imagination into impressions and ideas. From this follows certain resemblances, contiguity, and causal associations between impressions or ideas, and from this association we develop a sense of self. But even the notion of causality here is one of implied inference, not of actual inductive reason. Hume denies there is any real causality that can be known, although we operate "as if" we infer cause from effect. Even probability is reduced to a mere association of ideas and/or impressions; because neither reason (which always leads to infinite regress) or senses (which can always be deceived) can actually be true. The Enquiry also treats of miracles and the testimony of others derisively; but don't we rely on the testimony of others who claim the earth is round rather than flat, just as we rely on others who testify to miracles in a byegone era? After all, few of us have direct experience with a spherical earth (Popper makes this observation).

Hume's method incorporates five kinds of scepticism: (i) methodological, (ii) conceptual, (ii) nomological, (iv) explanatory, and (v) reductive empiricism. His commitment to scepticism is not without some capitulation. While he denies absolute causality and inductive inference and probability in an actual senses, he relies on them for practical purposes. One can't remain a pyrrhonist for long; some elements of reason and some degree of confidence in impressions is necessary for ordinary life. But if one starts with Descartes' starting point, extreme scepticism is a necessary entailment. Which, after seeing Hume deny so much intuition, is it really worth starting with Descartes' scepticism? Answering that question is what makes Hume interesting.

Hume at his best.......2005-10-09

David Hume was perhaps the leading light in the Empiricist movement in philosophy. Empiricism is seen in distinction from Rationalism, in that it doubts the viability of universal principles (rational or otherwise), and uses sense data as the basis of all knowledge - experience is the source of knowledge. Hume was a skeptic as well as empiricist, and had radical (for the time) atheist ideas that often got in the way of his professional advancement, but given his reliance on experience (and the kinds of experiences he had), his problem with much that was considered conventional was understandable.

Hume's major work, 'A Treatise of Human Nature', was not well received intially - according to Hume, 'it fell dead-born from the press'. Hume reworked the first part of this work in a more popular way for this text, which has become a standard, and perhaps the best introduction to Empiricism.

In a nutshell, the idea of empiricism is that experience teaches, and rules and understanding are derived from this. However, for Hume this wasn't sufficient. Just because billiard balls when striking always behave in a certain manner, or just because the sun always rose in the morning, there was no direct causal connection that could be automatically affirmed - we assume a necessary connection, but how can this be proved?

Hume's ideas impact not only metaphysics, but also epistemology and psychology. Hume develops empiricism to a point that empiricism is practically unsupportable (and it is in this regard that Kant sees this text as a very important piece, and works toward his synthesis of Empiricism and Rationalism). For Hume, empirical thought requires skepticism, but leaves it unresolved as far as what one then needs to accept with regard to reason and understanding. According to scholar Eric Steinberg, 'A view that pervades nearly all of Hume's philosophical writings is that both ancient and modern philosophers have been guilty of optimistic and exaggerated claims for the power of human reason.'

Some have seen Hume as presenting a fundamental mistrust of daily belief while recognising that we cannot escape from some sort of framework; others have seen Hume as working toward a more naturalist paradigm of human understanding. In fact, Hume is open to a number of different interpretations, and these different interpretations have been taken up by subsequent philosophers to develop areas of synthetic philosophical ideas, as well as further developments more directly out of Empiricism (such as Phenomenology).

This is in fact a rather short book, a mere 100 pages or so in many editions. As a primer for understanding Hume, the British Empiricists (who include Hobbes, Locke, and Berkeley), as well as the major philosphical concerns of the eighteenth century, this is a great text with which to start.

A comment on one part of Hume 's classic .......2005-02-27

First I would like to commend the excellent review of this book by CT Dreyer in which he correctly shows how Hume extended the empiricism of Locke and Berkeley to the point where skepticism seemed our only honest way of thinking about our knowledge of the world. Hume's questioning of induction, of how we can be sure tomorrow will be like today , his questioning of how we can trust our senses to know the outside world, his questioning of how we can hold our world logically together when analysis reveals that there is no necessary connection between ' cause' and 'effect' in everyday life action means he wakened not only Kant from his dogmatic slumber but Philosophy itself from the sense that it will provide absolute understanding.
Hume is a very clear writer. I remember reading the famous billiard ball account of causality in which our common sense view of ' before' and ' after' is questioned and taken apart. I believe Hume says after this account, something to the effect and ' still when we leave the room we leave by the door and not by the window'. A friend of mine in this class when the class ended opened the window ( on the ground floor ) and went out that way.
This is difficult and great philosophy. I do not pretend to understand it or its implications fully. A test of the mind and a necessary read for anyone who would know Western Philosophy.

As Exciting and Thought-Provoking as Philosophy Gets.......2004-02-28

Hume, I and many others think, was the greatest philosopher to have written in English, and this is the book to pick up if you want to introduce yourself to Saint David's distinctive brand of classical empiricism. This is a must-read for anyone with even a passing interest in philosophy, and it's hard for me to see how anyone interested in the history of modern thought can avoid reading this book or the corresponding sections of Hume's Treatise.

As is well-known, the Enquiry concerning Human Understanding was intended as an encapsulation and popularization of the views Hume defended in Book I of his magnum opus, A Treatise of Human Nature. Hume assumed that book's commercial failure could be accounted for by its length, difficulty, and lack of accessibility, and so, being a man who desired literary fame, he hoped to acquire commercial success by presenting the same ideas in a more appealing and accessible manner. Unfortunately, it seems Hume misunderstood what the literati of his day were looking for in a philosophical treatise. For the Enquiry, like the Treatise before it, didn't bring him the fame he sought. Still, Hume did understand what goes into writing excellent philosophical prose, and consequently this book is a much easier read than Book I of the Treatise. Indeed, this book constitutes an excellent introduction to Hume's thought, and, except for maybe Berkeley's Three Dialogues, I can't think of another primary source that would serve as a better introduction to classical British empiricism.

Now, let's get to the ideas here. Hume, like the other classical empiricists, was primarily concerned with the psychological question of the origin of our concepts. About the answer to this question, the empiricists were all agreed--our concepts are furnished by experience, which includes both sensory experience and introspection (i.e., the experience of our own mental states). And the empiricists also agreed about the way we can justify our beliefs. Some beliefs are true (or false) in virtue of the ideas they contained, and we can know their truth (or falsity) simply by thinking about them; other beliefs are true (or false) in virtue of how the external world is, and we can know their truth (or falsity) only by drawing on our experiences of the world. According to Hume, all substantial conclusions about the world fall into this second category. That is, the truth (or falsity) of all substantial claims about the existence and nature of things in the external world can be discovered only by checking those claims against the evidence of our senses.

The traditional way of placing Hume within the story of empiricism goes something like this. Hume takes up the empiricism of Locke and Berkeley and pushes it to its logical conclusion. Whereas Locke and Berkeley hadn't been wholly consistent empiricists, Hume, the true believer, demonstrates that classical empiricism leads to a pretty thoroughgoing skepticism. Since he's wholly convinced of the truth of his empiricist premises, Hume is willing to accept the skepticism that goes along with them. However, those who aren't convinced of that his empiricism is obviously correct think that Hume has actually demonstrated the implausibility of his empiricism. If this is where empiricism leads, they think, then it's clear that we need to reject empiricism. Indeed, some, like Thomas Reid, view Hume's arguments as constituting a reductio ad absurdum of his sort of empiricism. On this interpretation, Hume's philosophy essentially presents a dilemma for all future thinkers: abandon empiricism, or accept empiricism along with Humean skepticism.

But a different view of Hume, one of Hume as proposing a wholly naturalistic account of the human mind, has recently emerged as a competitor to the general conception of Hume's place within philosophy sketched in the previous paragraph. This interpretation downplays Hume's skepticism and emphasizes his professed intentions to provide a positive account of the operation of the human mind that appealed to nothing beyond the evidence of our senses. According to proponents of this interpretation, Hume is most interested in a description of the operation of the human mind. He's describing what human nature allows us to know and what it doesn't allow us to know. Furthermore, he argues that our nature is such that, where it fails to provide us with the resources to acquire the knowledge we might want, it provides us with a natural habit of forming the right conclusions anyway. Even though our nature limits our knowledge of the world, it ensures that we possess the habits of mind needed to make our way in the world. Hume dubs all these habits of mind "custom."

If this view is correct, then Hume has abjured many of the normative aims of traditional epistemological inquiry. He isn't attempting to show how we can answer a skeptic or why we have good reason to believe what we think we know. Instead, he wants us to stand back from our everyday beliefs and think about the natural processes that result in them. How, exactly, do our minds operate? How do we come to think what we do about the world? Hume thinks that this sort of inquiry will lead us see that, at some point, the explanation of why we think what we think reaches certain brute facts about the operation of the human mind. When we reach these points, there is nothing more to be said. We simply can't help thinking in these ways, and we lack the resources to demonstrate that these ways of thinking constitute an accurate way to represent the operation of the external world. And, Hume claims, it turns out that many of the fundamental elements of our conception of the world--the belief that things stand in causal relations to one another, the belief that we can know that there is a world outside our minds, the belief the future will resemble the past--end up not being open to ratification by experience. With respect to beliefs of these sorts, we ultimately have to appeal to custom in order to explain their existence and popularity. Hume, then, can be seen as demolishing the pretensions of reason in order to make room for a wholly naturalistic account of human thinking.

The Life of David Hume
Average customer rating:

Great book (but lousy printing)

Fine Biography

THE life of the extraordinary scottish philosopher

The Life of David Hume
Ernest Campbell Mossner
Manufacturer: Oxford University Press, USA
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Biographies & Memoirs | Subjects | Books
Philosophers | Professionals & Academics | Biographies & Memoirs | Subjects | Books
Scotland | Europe | History | Subjects | Books
Epistemology | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books
General | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books
History, 17th & 18th Century | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books
Modern | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books
Political | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books
Look Inside Biographies | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books
Look Inside History Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books
Look Inside Nonfiction Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books
Similar Items:

The Philosophy of David Hume: With a New Introduction by Don Garrett

The Cambridge Companion to Hume (Cambridge Companions to Philosophy)

An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding (Oxford Philosophical Texts)

A Treatise of Human Nature

Hume (The Arguments of the Philosophers)

ASIN: 0199243360

Book Description

Mossner's Life of David Hume remains the standard biography of this great thinker and writer. First published in 1954, and updated in 1980, it is now reissued in paperback, in response to increased interest in Hume. E. C. Mossner was Emeritus Professor of English at the University of Texas at Austin. 'Mossner's work is a quite remarkable scholarly achievement; it will be an indispensable tool for Hume scholars and a treasure-trove of information for all students of the intellectual and literary history of the eighteenth century' Richard H. Popkin in the Philological Quarterly 'This magnificent and exemplary work...has more than a biographical value. It is a study of intellectual reaction in the eighteenth century: a book for many readers, and not only for those of a philosophical turn.' C. E. Vulliamy in The Observer 'This is the work of a man thoroughly in love with his subject...this biography is the product of long and happy research. The length and the happiness both contribute to its merits.' The Times Literary Supplement

Customer Reviews:

Great book (but lousy printing).......2004-07-07

Given the price of this book - some 40% overpriced for a book of this type and lenghth - you'd think that at least the print job should be done properly. After all, this is the Oxford U Press. Well, in my copy, the ink quantity fluctuates, so that some paragraphs are dark while others light. This is a little annoying when the random contrasts have nothing to do with emphasis! Also, the back breaks so easily, that this book is effectively a pulp print. Then why the high price, pray tell me ?

Anyway, these are trivial matters. The book itself is very good. I consider it complementary to Norman Kemp Smith's study of Hume's philosophy, as it focuses on Hume the man rather than his philosophy. As Sir James Jeans said, the biography of a philosopher is not irrelevant to his thought, and Hume is no exception. (This is less true of natural scientists.) Mossner's book is particularly helpful in answering my own questions about Hume's religious views - a topic of the most controversial sort even in his own day.

I'm very impressed that Mossner pointed out the fact that Hume had inspired Einstein on his road to relativity. This little known fact was always very important in my own estimate of the great philosopher.

Here's the irony. Hume wrote his masterpiece in France, which remained the only place where he was really appreciated. Back in Scotland, he could not even find a proper job. And now, the best 20th century biography (there are good 19th century biographies) of Hume was written not by a Scotsman or even an Englishman, but by a Texan (probably) of Jewish descent. What have all these Edinburgh professors (excepting Smith, of course) been doing all these years? Given the primary sources at their disposal, why didn't they just pick up the pen to reconstruct the life of Scotland's - even Britain's - greatest non-scientific thinker? One suspects that to this day Hume is still under-appreciated in Scotland.

Mossner's biography of Hume is a labor of love.

Fine Biography.......2003-03-31

This is only modern biography of Hume. Very well written and researched, it concentrates on Hume's personal life and career as a man of letters. Hume is a wonderful subject for a biography; an important figure who is simultaneously a warm and attractive personality. Mossner does an excellent job of detailing Hume's personal life, friendships, and literary career. For individuals really interested in Hume, this book is a treasure trove of information. It is also a very valuable work on the intellectual culture of 18th century Scotland and the Enlightenment in general. Mossner describes very well the intellectual atmosphere of lowland Scotland, which produced not only Hume, but Adam Smith, the great chemist Joseph Black (though Mossner mentions him only as a physician), and numerous other important intellectuals. Mossner shows also the international quality of the Enlightenment. Within months of publication, Hume's Treatise on Human Nature was mentioned in German publications, and his later, more popular works were known across Europe. Hume had an international, even intercontinental (Benjamin Franklin), set of correspondents and friends. This books is a valuable companion to reading Hume's work.
What this book is not, however, is a full scale critical work. Actual discussion and analysis of Hume's important philosophical work is relatively brief. Nor is there much explicit discussion of the origins of Hume's thought in the work of prior 18th and 17th century thinkers. This biography was last revised in the late 1970s and apparently not greatly changed from the original version published in 1954. Over the course of the 20th century, Hume came to be regarded as one of the real titans of Western thought, with a corresponding increase in the secondary literature on Hume. We also know much more about the 18th century and the Enlightenment than Mossner. There is definitely a need for a major critical biography of Hume, though producing such a work could easily consume a scholar's career.

THE life of the extraordinary scottish philosopher.......1998-01-07

What is there not to like about this beautifully written account of the admirable David Hume? It conveys the time (American Independence, the flowering of Scottish genius, the major development of sceptical inquiry), the places (Scotland, England, France), the people: Rousseau, the French Court but most of all Hume himself whose good humour, decency and genius can only inspire others who have the courage to question. I think the full quality of this book is portrayed by the fact that twenty years after I gave a copy to my father he quotes Humes's comments on facing death in a letter to me. A book you could never give away without keeping a copy yourself.

Dialogues and Natural History of Religion (Oxford World's Classics)

Average customer rating:

A Must, A Classic, etc.
A philosopher thinks about God's existence
Essential Philosophy in a Nice (and Cheap) Edition
The truth that they will never teach you.
The most intelligent book ever written about religion

Dialogues and Natural History of Religion (Oxford World's Classics)
David Hume
Manufacturer: Oxford University Press, USA
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Modern | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Religious | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Religion & Spirituality | Subjects | Books

History | Religious Studies | Religion & Spirituality | Subjects | Books

Look Inside Nonfiction Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books

Look Inside Religion & Spirituality Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books

General | Religion & Spirituality | 4-for-3 Books Store | Stores | Books

All 4-for-3 Deals | 4-for-3 Books Store | Stores | Books
Similar Items:

A Treatise of Human Nature
An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals
The Nature of the Gods (Oxford World's Classics)
An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding (Oxford Philosophical Texts)
Discourse on Method and Meditations on First Philosophy, 4th Ed.

ASIN: 0192838768

Book Description

David Hume is the greatest and also one of the most provocative philosophers to have written in the English language. No philosopher is more important for his careful, critical, and deeply perceptive examination of the grounds for belief in divine powers and for his sceptical accounts of the causes and consequences of religious belief, expressed most powerfully in the Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion and The Natural History of Religion. The Dialogues ask if belief in God can be inferred from the nature of the universe or whether it is even consistent with what we know about the universe. The Natural History of Religion investigates the origins of belief, and follows its development from harmless polytheism to dogmatic monotheism. Together they constitute the most formidable attack upon the rationality of religious belief ever mounted by a philosopher. This edition also includes Section XI of The Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding and a letter concerning the Dialogues, as well as particularly helpful critical apparatus and abstracts of the main texts, enabling the reader to locate or relocate key topics.

Customer Reviews:

A Must, A Classic, etc........2005-09-29

This is a great resource for any theological library. Whether you agree or disagree with what Hume writes, this book is `a must' as you wrestle with faith and epistemic certainty. It is used in many theology and philosophy classes and will aid any reader to become more familiar with a different perspective on the origin of religion, the Enlightenment struggle with reason and faith and the broader conversation of contemporary epistemology.

A philosopher thinks about God's existence.......2005-03-08

David Hume, a philosopher of the period often classified as British Empiricism, is the intellectual associate of philosophers John Locke and George Berkeley. Born in Edinburgh in 1711, he attended the University of Edinburgh but did not graduate. He went to France during his 20s, and spent time there working on what would become his most famous work, 'An Enquiry into Human Understanding', first published under the title 'Treatise of Human Nature'. However, Hume was a prolific writer, and dealt with many areas of philosophy, including politics and ethics, epistemology, and metaphysics. He wrote in the area of history as well, and had a politic career as British ambassador to France and a post as a minister in the government for a few years. His final work, 'Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion', was published posthumously in 1779, although work had begun on it as early as the 1750s.

Hume was very concerned about rationality. Hume was never publicly and explicitly an atheist, but his rational mind, concerned about sensory and intelligible evidence, led him to question and doubt most major systems of religion, including the more general philosophical sense of religion and proofs of the existence of God. The primary arguments in his 'Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion' deal with the Argument from Design, and the Cosmological Argument. There is an assumed distinction here between natural religion and revealed religion, an especially important distinction in the Enlightenment and post-Enlightenment philosophical structure.

- Natural Religion and Revealed Religion -

Natural religion is the idea that we come to know and understand God (and, consequently, what God wants or expects of us, if anything) simply from nature and our sensory perceptions, as well as our interpretations (emotion and rational) of this kind of understanding. From very early in his writing career, Hume attacked the idea of natural religion and most of its conclusions, drawing a sharp line between what we can actually know and what ends up being fanciful extrapolations based on other-than-rational ideas and evidence. Revealed religion is primary what most religions base themselves upon - the burning bush to Moses, the resurrection and post-resurrection appearances to the Apostles, the Buddha's enlightenment under the tree - these are examples of revelation. While Hume does take on the idea of revealed religion in his other works, this particular text does not concern itself with that topic, and stays in the domain of addressing natural religion.

- The Argument from Design -

Arguments from Design have always had a strong appeal to believers within religious frameworks; they have often been used as tools of evangelism, as attempts to show that beyond the revealed doctrines, the very nature of things points to a creator. In very short order, the Argument from Design in Hume's newly-industrial time might have read like this:

- Machines are designed by beings with intelligence.
- The world and the universe it is in resembles a machine.
- Therefore, the world must have been created by means of intelligent design.

This is an argument by analogy, and is convincing to some, but often more convincing to those already inclined to believe in the existence of God.

- The Cosmological Argument -

The Cosmological Argument is at once both more subtle and more simple. The most simple way of stating it would be that God is the 'first cause' of everything. If everything has to have a cause (even the whole universe), then that first cause must be God. In the twentieth century era of thinking of a universe that began with a Big Bang, it seemed to some that the Cosmological Argument was confirmed.

Hume would have been familiar with Leibniz's more subtle form of the Cosmological Argument, which argues for a world of infinite contingent causes. However, there has to be something outside of this system of infinite causes that produced the series - thus, even in a universe with no set beginning or ending, there would still need to be an overarching cause.

- Hume's Arguments -

Hume argues on many levels. His first criticism of the Argument from Design is that this analogy (as are most arguments from analogy) is faulty and not exact; we have no idea if the universe is like a machine. Even if it was, machines are often designed and built by several designers - why argue for one God rather than several? How do we know that matter and the universe don't have their own, internal self-organising principles?

With regard to the Cosmological Argument, the argument is a little more strained. Hume argues that, in any series of causality, once one knows about each cause, it makes no sense to inquire beyond the sequence of causes to some other effect. This is a very Empirical argument, to be sure, and while perhaps not entirely satisfying, it still has merit in philosophy to this day.

- Hume's Structure -

This is a dialogue, set up in the classical way of people talking with each other about the subjects. Hume draws primarily from Cicero, whose work 'On the Nature of the Gods' uses characters of the same names. However, whereas Cicero was concerned about the nature of the Gods (their attributes, powers, etc.) and not their existence, it is the very existence of God that occupies Hume's thoughts.

Hume, despite many years of work on this text, probably never quite thought it was finished. He left the work to Adam Smith (the noted economist, and friend of Hume in Edinburgh), who also thought the arguments against the existence of God were too strong, and likely too damaging to Hume's overall reputation. The tug-of-war over the publication makes for interesting reading in and of itself.

These are important arguments, worthy of discussion and dialogue in philosophy classes, theology classes, and among others who ponder the existence of God.

Essential Philosophy in a Nice (and Cheap) Edition.......2004-06-06

This is a wonderful collection of Hume's most famous and influential writings on religion. Few books I've encountered include this much first-rate philosophy for the price, and so I recommend this book to anyone who is interested in Hume's thinking about religion. It includes the section on miracles from Hume's Enquiry concerning the Principles of Morals and the full versions of both The Natural History of Religion and the Dialogues concerning Natural Religion. (Hume's short autobiography, "My Own Life," is also included.) Furthermore, Gaskin has provided some helpful editorial material: there's a useful introductory essay discussing the selections, and he includes explanatory notes that clarify some of Hume's more obscure references.

The central theme of Hume's religious thought is the central theme of his philosophical thought as a whole--namely the extent of our ignorance and the impotence of human reason to discover the things we really want to discover. And, for this reason, his writing on religion provides a good illustration of his general philosophical method: he begins by pointing out the impotence of reason, and then he offers a naturalistic psychological explanation of why we continue to think as we do. Our tendency to believe various religious thesis, he argues, cannot be explained as a justifiable way of thinking about the world that we arrive at through the use of reason. It is, instead, explained by certain general principles governing the operation of human minds. And two major works in this volume illustrate the two components of Hume's philosophical method. In the Dialogues he argues that neither empirical research nor the a priori exercise of reason is likely to reveal that our religious beliefs are justified. In The Natural History he begins the project of explaining why we do in fact believe what we do about religion.

As I said above, the Dialogues pertain to the first part of the method. Most of the Dialogues is devoted to discussion of a posteriori arguments for the existence of God, though there is also a short section on various a priori arguments. The main argument considered here is the classical argument from design, which Hume seems to understand as an analogical argument of the following sort: the complexity and order of the universe show that it is similar to artifacts created by human intelligences; similar causes have similar effects; therefore, the universe must have been created by a being with something like a human intelligence; therefore, the universe must have been created by God.

Hume's objections to this argument are legion, and many of the individual objections are both ingenious and forceful. He provides reasons for thinking that the universe isn't all that similar to artifacts created by human beings. Hume also provides for thinking that, even if we think the universe is similar to a human artifact, we ought to think the universe was created by a being quite unlike God. In addition, he suggests certain speculative naturalistic explanations of the existence and nature of the universe; and he claims that it's unclear why an appeal to divine creation is to be preferred to these speculative naturalistic stories of the universe's creation. Hume's cumulative case against the argument from design is quite impressive. Indeed, I'm pretty sure that Hume has shown that the argument from design is more or less worthless as support for anything resembling traditional theism.

But where, in the end, does Hume come down on the issue of theism? It seems clear that he has no sympathy for organized religion, or for any religious views that purport to describe the nature of God, His intentions, or how and why He created the universe as He did. For any such religious view is going to overstep the bounds within which he thinks human reason can operate. And the only positive religious claim that is given respectful treatment here is the bare claim that we have reason to think that the cause of the universe as a whole is somewhat similar to a human intelligence. But does acceptance of this minimal thesis amount to his being a theist? It's very hard to tell. The problem is that it often seems Hume's explicit advocation of this position amounts to little more than a description of what he thinks is an inevitable human tendency to think this way.

And this is where the second part of his project, the part carried out in The Natural History of Religion, becomes relevant. For The Natural History is the work in which Hume sets out to trace the sources of religious belief to certain natural principles of the human mind. There he argues that the the operation of our minds, along with the conditions in which we find ourselves, leads us to arrive at the sorts of religious beliefs we find to be popular in past and present human societies. Our ignorance about the way the world operates and our apprehensiveness about the ways these unknowns can affect our lives naturally lead human beings to a form of polytheism. We tend to attribute the underlying principles by which the world operates to a large number human-like beings, and this is what polytheistic religion amounts to. But once polytheism is in place our tendency to attribute greater powers and more perfect natures to individual gods leads us to something closer to monotheistic views according to which there is a single wholly perfect being behind all the underlying principles governing the world and behind the existence of the world itself.

It should be clear, then, why it's difficult to pin down just what Hume though about religion. He does think that it's hard for beings like us to deny the general thesis that the universe as a whole was probably created by a human-like intelligence. For given how our minds actually work, he seems to think, we're bound to think something like this about the origin of the universe. Yet it's somewhat unclear that he thinks forming beliefs in this way is reliable. It may simply be that we have a brute instinct to think in a way that insures we'll see the world as resulting from some human-like intelligence, and it's at least not clear that that isn't a debunking account of the plausibility of theism.

The truth that they will never teach you........2003-06-04

Hume is a master, one of the most important philosophers ever. In the Natural History, Hume masterfully shows the natural evolution of religion. From its crude beginings of polytheism to the more refined monotheism, comparing the value systems of each. Monotheism has roots and can be traced to a source. He concludes that any rational mind would aviod the unstable houses of religion altogether.

The most intelligent book ever written about religion.......2002-05-23

Hume's Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion is by far the most fascinating and critical look at religion I have ever read. The work is extremely well thought-out and, in my opinion, unbiased as well. As the editor, J.C.A. Gaskin, points out, Hume, in expressing points of view opposing to his own, portrays these views accurately and succeeds in anticipating his oponents' counter-arguments.

Second to the magnificence of Hume's ideas, the greatest thing about this book (and Hume's work in general) is the complete clarity of his writing and the ease with which the reader can follow the logical progression of his ideas.

I consider Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion to be Hume's greatest work. Regardless of your personal beliefs, Hume will make you re-think your views about religion and the universe.

Book Description

This is the first volume of a two-volume set containing the most important secondary literature on Hume on Religion (Volume 2, to be published in August 1996, deals with general remarks on Hume and Natural Religion). Focusing on responses to the Essay on Miracles, the material included in this volume ranges from 1751 to 1883.

Authors include:
T. Rutherford, William Adams, John Leland, George Campbell, Revd. S. Vince, John Hollis, Revd. James Somerville, Dr. Wately, Revd. A. C. L. D'Arblay, Revd. Francis Kilvert, Malthus, Joseph Napier, Joseph Mazzini Wheeler, Sir Edmund Beckett, James McCosh, and Huxley.

Hume on Natural Religion (Thoemmes Press - Key Issues)

Average customer rating:

Hume on Natural Religion (Thoemmes Press - Key Issues)
David Hume
Manufacturer: Thoemmes Continuum
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

History, 17th & 18th Century | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Modern | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Religious | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Religion & Spirituality | Subjects | Books

Look Inside Religion & Spirituality Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books
ASIN: 1855064510

Book Description

Focuses on general remarks on Hume's life and philosophy, his Natural History of Religion, Dialogues concerning Natural Religion, and his work on the immortality of the soul and suicide. Contributors include: William Warburton, Henry O'Connor, Thomas Hayter, Joseph Priestley, Joseph Milner, William Craven, and George Giles.

Hume and Machiavelli: Political Realism and Liberal Thought

Average customer rating:

Hume and Machiavelli: Political Realism and Liberal Thought
Frederick G. Whelan
Manufacturer: Lexington Books
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

History, 17th & 18th Century | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Political | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Qualifying Textbooks - Spring 2007 | Stores | Books
ASIN: 0739106317

Book Description

Although there are myriad references to Machiavelli's work within Hume's writing, a deeper connection between the two has never been fully explored. Whelan uncovers extensive Machiavellian dimensions throughout Hume's work, illustrating numerous parallels in both theorists' treatment of such issues as human nature, historical method, and political ethics. While at first such a comparison may be startling, Whelan argues convincingly that Hume's writing, commonly regarded as moderate and amiable, is indeed a locus of realist liberal political theory.

An Enquiry concerning the Principles of Morals (Oxford Philosophical Texts)

Average customer rating:

Disappointed with the production of the book
Of Two Minds
A Humane and Optimistic Account of Morality
Outstanding Edition
Hume was one of the most forward-thinking men of his time.

An Enquiry concerning the Principles of Morals (Oxford Philosophical Texts)
David Hume
Manufacturer: Oxford University Press, USA
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

Ethics & Morality | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Modern | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Qualifying Textbooks - Spring 2007 | Stores | Books
ASIN: 0198751842

Book Description

The Oxford Philosophical Texts series consists of authoritative teaching editions of canonical texts in the History of Philosophy from the ancient world down to modern times. Each volume, issued in a uniform and affordable paperback format, provides a clear, well laid out text together with a comprehensive introduction by a leading specialist, giving the student detailed critical guidance on the intellectual context of the work and the structure and philosophical importance of the main arguments. Endnotes are supplied to expand further on the arguments and explain unfamiliar references and terminology, and a full bibliography and index are also included. The series aims to build up a definitive corpus of key texts in the Western philosophical tradition, which will form a reliable and enduring resource for students and teachers alike. Shortly before his death, David Hume declared his Enquiry concerning the Principles of Morals (1751) to be the best of his many writings. In this highly influential work, Hume sets out his theory of justice and benevolence, and the other virtues, and argues that morality is founded on the natural feelings or `sentiments' of humankind. The text printed in this edition is that of the Clarendon critical edition of Hume's works. A substantial introduction by the editor explains the intellectual background to the work and its relationship to the rest of Hume's philosophy. The volume also includes detailed explanatory notes on the text, a glossary of terms, a full list of references, and a section of supplementary readings.

Download Description

AS the mutual shocks, in SOCIETY, and the oppositions of interest and self-love have constrained mankind to establish the laws of JUSTICE, in order to preserve the advantages of mutual assistance and protection: in like manner, the eternal contrarieties, in COMPANY, of men's pride and self-conceit, have introduced the rules of Good Manners or Politeness, in order to facilitate the intercourse of minds, and an undisturbed commerce and conversation.

Customer Reviews:

Disappointed with the production of the book.......2007-03-16

I expected more from the production of the book. Yes, it contains the complete text of "An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals," but:
1. There is nothing else, not even a page giving the year in which David Hume first published it.
2. There are numerous formatting errors. For example, in several places a paragraph is broken in the middle of a sentence.
3. Footnotes are put in the body of the text rather than at the bottom of the page.

On the other hand:
1. A decent sized font has been used, so the text is easy to read.
2. The book is printed on high quality paper.

In retrospect, I wish I had bought a book with an editor's introduction.

Of Two Minds.......2005-03-19

Hume treats of morals in two distinct fashions. His major and last contribution is his "Enquiry," which was written late in his life; the other is Part III of his "Treatise on Human Nature," which was written much earlier in life. The two treatments are very different, and of the two, I much prefer the latter, as it is "demonstrated" a posteriori that man has a "natural inclincation" to maximize pleasure and to avoid pain. Besed on this natural inclination, humans endeavor to do those things that produce happiness, pride, joy, etc., because it maximizes pleasure, whereas humans endeavor to avoid those things that produce uneasiness, disturbances, misery, etc., because those things produce pain. From this a posteriori of natural inclinations, Hume explores the reasons why some things count as virtures (because they maximize pleasure), while some things count as vices (because they produce pain).

His "Enquiry," however, takes an altogether different approach, one based on the sentiments of utility and beneficence. Here humans do things that maximize their usefulness to themselves and to society that concomitantly bring beneficence. Those sentiments that are distinguished in natural language such as dexterity, perserverance, chastity, endurance, honesty, etc., count as virtues because they are "useful," while those that produce in natural language such things as sloth, lethargy, dishonesty, misery, etc., count as vice because they are "not useful." Our language itself is the measure of their untility.

The two theories, juxtaposed, are not at odds with each other, but definitely have distinctively different aetiologies. What I prefer about the "Treatise" is that one can infer the logical necessity of "natural inclinations" (dare I say "instinct") to maximize pleasure and avoid pain. This seems indisputably true empirically. Morals are indeed an a posteriori part of the human constitution. All the virtues and vices derived from this single principle have a solid foundation in human nature itself. Conversely, to merely posit that virtues and vices are merely sentiments according to their "utility" is less grounded in the person's natural inclinations, and is something one observes about human behavior in general.

Which approach will the reader prefer? That's difficult to determine, which is a good reason to read both the "Treatise" and the "Enquiry." As I already mentioned, they are not at odds with each other, they just have different starting points. Personally, the approach in the "Treatise" appeals because it starts with a intrinsic feature of what it is to be human, i.e., it seems to have a stronger foundation and logically inferred consequences from observances. Yet, the approach in the "Enquiry" is more vivacious, but is less grounded, because it is merely posits observances of ephemeral conditions that continually change from time to time and from culture to culture. If one wants to affirm that morals do have a solid foundation in human nature, you'll probably prefer the "Treatise," but if one wants to affirm that morals are merely "preferences" built into our natural language that differ from culture to culture and from time to time, you'll probably prefer the "Enquiry." Either way, however, they take us away from pie-in-the-sky metaphysical speculations!

A Humane and Optimistic Account of Morality.......2004-05-27

Hume, for most people, is largely defined by his work in metaphysics and epistemology. There's no doubt that his work in these areas is of signal importance, but I think a tendency to focus on these areas at the expense of his moral thinking suggests a somewhat misleading interpretation of what he's up to. It's really only in his non-moral works that the picture of Hume as a radical skeptic has much plausibility. For here it seems clear that Hume's primary aim in his moral works is to ground his philosophical theses in a careful consideration of human nature; and it's also clear that he doesn't intend this to be a skeptical and debunking account of morality.

Now, it's true that there are ways in which Hume is skeptical about a certain way of thinking about the origin and nature of morality. The fact that he thinks morality is based in human sentiments show that he is, in some sense, a subjectivist about morality. He doesn't think there is any plausible account of our moral thinking as based on reason or empirical inquiry alone. Against the view that our awareness of moral distinctions is based on the exercise of reason, he argues that we do not figure out whether a person is virtuous or vicious, or an action good or bad, simply by thinking about things. And against the view that our awareness of moral distinctions is empirical, he argues that we do not figure out which things possess which moral qualities by going out and looking or by anything else of this sort. Morality, then, is more a matter of feeling than a matter of thinking, observing, and reasoning.

Hume's basic argument for the conclusion that morality is based on human sentiment is that the essential practicality of morality requires us to understand its basis in this way. Morality is about action, and neither reasoning nor ordinary empirical inquiry can be the source of our moral thinking since they are impotent to prompt us to action. Reason does not motivate, and our moral judgments, concerns, sentiments are intimately connected to motivation. Nor does recognition of the empirical facts motivate all on its own. Motivation always requires the existence of certain conative states in addition to the relevant beliefs arrived at through reason and empirical inquiry. So, in order to account for the practicality of morality (i.e. for the connection between morality and motivation), we need something to make us care about moral goodness and badness; and that something is to be found within the emotional part of our nature.

But, importantly, Hume doesn't think this is indicative of some problem with morality, and so he doesn't understand himself to be undermining ordinary morality. His aim is to expose the groundless pretensions of reason in order to make room for a wholly naturalistic account morality; it's not to show that morality doesn't have a firm basis. For he does not think that morality would ideally be based on reason and empirical evidence rather than sentiment. Rather, he thinks there is a sort of philosophical overreaching involved in trying to base morality on reason or empirical evidence as opposed to sentiment.

So far, so good. But what is the relevant sentiment? According to Hume, it is a general sort of benevolence, of concern for others. At least where our own interests do not intrude on this feeling, we can take pleasure in the pleasure of others and we can be disturbed and pained by their pains and difficulties. Our possessing such a feeling does not mean that we'll always set aside our own interest in the interest of others; nor does it mean that we are not largely self-interested. It does, however, mean that we're not wholly self-interested, as we are motivated to do (and not do) certain things even when they do not affect our own interests and desires. Such a feeling, Hume argues, must be the basis for the sort of general and unselfish concern for welfare of others that morality requires of us. And since this sentiment is a common component of human nature, it provides morality with a non-parochial basis. The moral point of view, Hume argues, is one we take up when our sentiments and feelings about people and actions are based on a shared perspective based in human nature. And since we share similar sentiments and sensibilities in virtue of our shared nature, morality possesses a sort of intersubjectivity.

But what inspires these sentiments, and how exactly do they translate into moral judgments? Morality, Hume argues, is based on sentiments of approbation and disapprobation that are prompted by a recognition of the connection between human actions, dispositions, etc. and what is in the best interest of oneself and of mankind in general. What we take to be virtues, Hume argues, are those dispositions that lead a person to perform actions tending to promote his own happiness and the happiness of others, whereas vices are dispositions that do the opposite. And this allows us to see the source of Hume's optimism. For it is his view that being moral is in our own interest, and in the interest of others. The morally good person is one whose actions are for the good of himself and for the good of others, and this is why we approve of such people. This is why we find them pleasant, why we enjoy their company, and why we think it's a good thing to be virtuous. So this is anything but a dark, self-denying account of morality and our moral obligations. Morality is not a set of chains holding us back from realizing ourselves, from expressing our true nature. Given what our nature is actually like, Hume claims, there is no need to understand morality as involving self-abnegation for nothing more than self-abnegation's sake.

If I had to recommend a single book in moral philosophy to the general reader, I suppose it would be this one. There may be greater works of moral philosophy--Kant's works and Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics, for instance--but those are works for the philosopher and this is a book for everyone. It's wise, accessible, inspiring, beautifully written, occasionally quite funny, and largely convincing.

Outstanding Edition.......2003-01-09

This is another outstanding edition in the Oxford Philosophical Texts series. This is a first rate book for both students and experts on Hume. It contains an excellent annotated edition of the Enquiry itself, excellent background information on Hume, a very nice introduction to the Enquiry written by Tom Beauchamp, a leading Hume scholar and moral philosopher, an outstanding guide to the Hume literature, and a good glossary. All for a very reasonable price.

An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals (EPM) is one of the cornerstone texts in Western philosophy and is written with Hume's characteristic combination of incisive analysis and charming style. Hume's goal is to describe the bases of human moral conduct. As stated by Tom Beauchamp, EPM is descriptive rather than prescriptive. While Hume clearly has strong opinions about what constitutes appropriate moral conduct, in EPM his focus is really on moral psychology rather than moral direction. This approach is what would now be called metaethical. As with his work on epistemology, Hume is also concerned with establishing the limits of human reason. In Hume's analysis, reason has an important but limited role in moral judgements, crucial for reaching appropriate judgements but does not establish the basic principles for moral judgement. Hume sees morality as based on an interesting interplay of moral sentiments, which he sees as intrinsic to human nature, self-interest, and social utility. The importance of each of these varies with considerably in different social settings. In family life and close personal relationships, moral sentiments dominate but the force of moral sentiment weakens as the range of socieity increases. In more complex social settings, Hume sees a form of utilitarianism as restraining self-interest. For Hume, specific moral systems are variable, somewhat situation dependent, and historically contingent. Thought provoking and very readable.

Hume was one of the most forward-thinking men of his time........1999-05-07

David Hume is a genius philosopher. His basic principle-- knowledge can only come from experience. His ideas on morality are indicative of a rich understanding of the mind and its surrounding world. This book should be read by anybody interested in morality, religion (its viability) and experience. He is a fascinating thinker.

Philosophers:

Philosophers

Philosophers