Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
David Hume: essays
Comparison between Hume and Locke
David Hume: essays
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: David Hume: essays
In the Introduction of the Treatise, Hume states that many sciences are closely related and depend on the science of man, namely knowledge of human nature. Any inquiry is a human inquiry, in his word, “The science of man is the only solid foundation for the other sciences." (P4) Hume believes all he have assess to is his own experiences. Hence, according to Hume’s experimental philosophy, the study of the science of man must based on the empirical method, such as observation and experiment. It’s clear to see Hume’s project in the Treatise is to establish the general elements of the science of man based on an empirical foundation. Following empiricist John Lock’s theory of mind and knowledge, Hume also argues that the experiences, namely perceptions drive all of our knowledge and idea. In explaining how human minds work, Hume first accepts the view that we have no direct access to the external world, but have a mental entities corresponding to the physical object, namely ideas. As mentioned earlier, Hume believes that everything is traceable to experience. Hence, he begins with the …show more content…
The only difference Hume identifies between impressions and ideas is their degree of force and vivacity. For example, an idea is weaker and fainter compares than the impression, because “idea is an image of impression” (1.1.1.11) it is created after we experienced it. Hume holds on the view that all ideas are based on impression, in a sense that all ideas mimic or copy the perceptions of the senses, this is also known as the copy theory. In other words, we cannot have an idea without having had an impression of the idea. For instance, a blind person will have no idea of color, nor a deaf person has an idea of sounds. Hume, like Locke, denies the existence of innate ideas. However, he does extend the meaning of “idea” as indicating all perceptions, sensations, passions, and
Hume argues that perception can be divided into two types: impressions and ideas. He states that impressions are our first-hand perception, using all of our senses and emotions to experience them (Hume 2012, 8). For example, an impression of a sensation would be experiencing pain and an impression of reflection would be experiencing anger. Hume states that an idea is thinking about an impression. You cannot use your senses to experience the sensation or emotion, you are just simply reflecting on your experience (Hume 2007, 13). For example, thinking about the pain you felt when you stubbed your toe or thinking about how angry you felt when your football team lost. Hume argues that our thought is limited. He argues that when we imagine things such as an orange sea, we are simply joining two consistent ideas together. Hume argues that ‘all our ideas or more feeble perceptions are copies of our impressions or more lively ones’ (Hume 2007, 13). This is called the Copy Principle.
In conclusion of this paper, from the arguments stated above about Humes’ and Descartes philosophical positions, Hume has a stronger position on the existence of the external world.
In this section, Hume begins by categorizing knowledge into types: relations of ideas and matters of fact. Relations of ideas are knowable a priori and negating such a statement would lead to a contradiction, and matters of fact are knowable a posteriori, or through experience, and the negation would not be a contradiction. While relations of ideas are generally used in mathematics, matters of fact are significant in determining how one experiences the world; the beliefs an individual has are formed through his experience, thus making cognition a matter of fact.... ... middle of paper ...
Locke feels that we do not have any innate ideas. Then the question arises of
Hume began his first examination if the mind by classifying its contents as Perceptions. “Here therefore [he divided] all the perceptions of the mind into two classes or species.” (27) First, Impressions represented an image of something that portrayed an immediate relationship. Secondly, there were thoughts and ideas, which constituted the less vivid impressions. For example, the recalling of a memory. From this distinction, Hume decreed that all ideas had origin within impressions.
Let us then suppose the mind to be, as we say, white paper void of all characters, without any ideas. How comes it to be furnished? Whence comes it by that vast store which the busy and boundless fancy of man has painted on it with an almost endless variety? Whence has it all the materials of reason and knowledge? To this I answer, in one word, from experience (Locke, 1690/1947, bk. II, chap. 1, p.26).
In science, Hume recognized a problem with scientific causality. He saw science as being based on inductive reasoning, which results in generalized rules or principles.
Our mind then processes that perception into an idea. A great example I can give is from my childhood. I was playing outside by my elderly neighbor and she said, “Stop,” and I did, which made her tell me I was very obedient. I didn’t know what that word meant so I looked it up and did not like the definition. Ever since that day I tried to not be obedient unless I wanted to be or absolutely needed to be. I heard something I didn’t know anything about, researched it and reflected on it and decided I didn’t want to be that. My experience makes me agree with Locke because I was able to process what happened to me and decide for
John Locke, Berkeley and Hume are all empiricist philosophers that believe in different things. They have things in common such as the three anchor points; The only source of genuine knowledge is sense experience, reason is an unreliable and inadequate route to knowledge unless it is grounded in the solid bedrock of sense experience and there is no evidence of innate ideas within the mind that are known from experience. The relationship between our thoughts and the world around us consisted of concepts which were developed from these philosophers. I have argued that Locke, Berkeley and Hume are three empiricists that have different believes.
As Locke advances into his reasoning, he expands on the definition of a person, as beings that are able to rationalize, perceive, and contemplate. These are all faculties that are in fact “conscious” or in other words, things that we are self- aware of. A person is aware of themselves as well as their surroundings, which they are able to perceive through their senses and from there, they are able to internally rationalize, think and interpret. Locke’s definition of a person would require them to possess a certain level of intellectual understanding and poses innate characteristic, such as those possessed by human, however this will evidently exclude all other animals from this category. The contextual meaning of consciousness also helps derive of the concept of self.
Kant directly deals with the problems presented in Hume's analysis of metaphysics. Where Hume stops his line of thinking and becomes skeptical as to the existence of metaphysics as a science, Kant picks up. He proceeds to analyze both the validity of metaphysics as a science and a force in our lives. Turning to the methods of other credible men in the scientific field- such as Copernicus- Kant develops a whole new approach to looking at the world. However, like Hume, Kant encounters an obstacle and does not find a solution for it.
In Appendix I., Concerning Moral Sentiment, David Hume looks to find a place in morality for reason, and sentiment. Through, five principles he ultimately concludes that reason has no place within the concept of morality, but rather is something that can only assist sentiment in matters concerning morality. And while reason can be true or false, those truths or falsities apply to facts, not to morality. He then argues morals are the direct result of sentiment, or the inner feeling within a human being. These sentiments are what intrinsically drive and thus create morality within a being.
Hume uses senses, like Descartes, to find the truth in life. By using the senses he states that all contents of the mind come from experience. This leads to the mind having an unbound potential since all the contents are lead by experiences. The mind is made up two parts impressions and ideas. Impressions are the immediate data of the experience. For example, when someone drops a book on the desk and you hear a loud sound. The sight of the book dropping and hitting the desk is registered by an individual’s senses- sight, sound, feeling. Hume believes there are two types of impressions, original and secondary impressions. Original impressions are based on the senses,
John Locke (1632-1704) was the first of the classical British empiricists. (Empiricists believed that all knowledge derives from experience. These philosophers were hostile to rationalistic metaphysics, particularly to its unbridled use of speculation, its grandiose claims, and its epistemology grounded in innate ideas) If Locke could account of all human knowledge without making reference to innate ideas, then his theory would be simpler, hence better, than that of Descartes. He wrote, “Let us then suppose the mind to be, as we say, white paper, void of all characters, without any ideas: How comes it to be furnished? To his I answer, in one word, from EXPERIENCE.” (Donald Palmer, p.165)
Remember that according to Descartes, what I know first and foremost are my ideas. It is only later that he seeks to know if the extramental world exists, and so he begins with his ideas and then moves towards real being (rather than vice versa). Somewhere along the line the notion of idea undergoes a transformation. Soon an idea becomes a sense impression or an image. Remember that for the Greeks and Mediaeval thinkers, an idea is not reducible to an image. An idea cannot be imagined, but is an essence abstracted from the phantasm and understood. But this gets confused after Descartes. For example, John Locke says that ideas "...stand for whatsoever is the object of the understanding when a man thinks, I have used it to express whatever is meant by phantasm, notion, species, or whatever it is which the mind can be employed about in thinking..."