Comparing David Hume's Empirical And Skepticism

David Hume’s doctrines on Gnoseology is Empirical and Skepticism. His “Copy Thesis” which teaches that all ideas are ultimately copied from impressions is parallel to Plato’s idealism which reaches that the world of sensation is only a shadow of the world of ideas. His empiricism is an absolute opposition to rationalism which teaches that certainty of knowledge can be attained by human intellect. Although he is an empiricist, he does not absolutely deny the existence of the world of ideas. In fact he has this “Hume’s livelihood thesis” which teaches that impressions are more vivid than that of ideas. Concerning his empiricism, I can say that ideas originated from empirical knowledge cannot attain certitude for the reason that when we perceive

His skepticism is as mitigated skepticism which denies certitude but accepts probability. Hume also wrote in his treatise, “I had almost said that this was certain but I reflect that it must be reduced itself as well as every other reasoning, and from knowledge degenerates into probability.” In his writing, I would like to stress out what he said, “Knowledge degenerates into probability.” His teaching says that no one can attain certainty in knowledge because upon acquiring it, it can lead to error and to another form of probability. Like any other skepticism, I can say that this skepticism is autocratic. Therefore, his doctrine, “knowledge degenerates into probability” is a doctrine which is uncertain and must therefore be considered as probability. His doctrine destroys itself. The good about Hume’s skepticism is that it is a moderate skepticism. Moderate skepticism does not struggle with attempting to avoid having beliefs that go beyond the evidence of reason. They admit most of what they believe goes beyond what they can reliably know or even understand. This skepticism does not deny absolutely the certainty of human knowledge which is helpful to attain human