Product Description
Philosopher David Hume was considered to one of the most important figures in the age of Scottish enlightenment. In "An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding" Hume discusses the weakness that humans have in their abilities to comprehend the world around them, what is referred to in the title as human understanding. This work, now commonly required reading in philosophy classes, exposed a broad audience to philosophy when it was first published. A great introduction to the philosophy of David Hume, "An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding" and the ideas within it are as intriguing today as when they were first written. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (5)

Good book
This is a great book.It is very concise and to the point.It is not light reading though.It is packed full of content and deep thinking.

Great writing style, but that's about it
Hume contradicts himself all over the place.If our knowledge is so impoverished, how does he establish unalterable natural laws in order to dispense with miracles?Humanist magazines regard Hume as a model humanist.Yet, how many of these humanists, including Hume, ever did anything for their fellow man?I know plenty of Christians, such as Mother Theresa and so forth, who have spent their lives feeding, clothing and sheltering the poor; but, I cannot recall one humanist who has ever done anything unselfish and philanthropic."Humanism" is perhaps the greatest misnomer of all time.And Hume's thesis is nothing more than another freemasonic attack upon Christianity because they hate the Truth of Christianity, which is Jesus Christ and His message.

Should not be read alone
Hume is over-rated.He skirts between the obvious and the incorrect.He asserts that geometry and math are unreal or analytical, to use a technical term, as opposed to real or synthetic.He is right about Euclidian geometry, but not math.Math is not analytical but synthetic.
While the proposition (a = b therefore b = a) is analytical, as it is a definition, from which (c = b therefore c = a) may be derived.
The initial proposition is a definition, not any type of observation.The conclusion is a derivation from the definition, not an observation.

But,(1 + 1 = 2) is an observation, synthetic knowledge.The ability to count is derived from the initial thing counted; it is not a mere definition.Were Hume correct, an analytical proposition could be used to establish a synthetic reality, which is impossible.

v = f(x) where v is variation and f means a function and x is a value.
It is a concept, analytical, saying nothing about reality.If you add reality:v being variation in gender of an human individual and w being weight.Gender does not alter because weight changes.But if you say v is weight and x is age, there will be a change in weight with age.

If the analytical could prove the synthetic, existance would become a true predicate.

Excellent.
I am surprised that Desmond David Hume had time to write such an amazing book while he was a monk, a military grunt, a sailing enthusiast and of course a member of the Dharma Initiative.Perhaps his catchphrase "See you in another life, brutha" is his hint that he has multiple lives like a cat, thus giving him time to write such an amazing piece of work.

Hume at his best
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.
... Read more

Product Description
In his writings, David Hume set out to bridge the gap between the learned world of the academy and the marketplace of polite society. This collection, drawing largely on his Essays Mortal, Political, and Literary (1776 edition), comprehensively shows how far he succeeded.
As seen in these selections, Hume embraces a staggering range of social, cultural, political, demographic, and historical concerns, charting the state of civil society, manners, morals, and taste, and the development of political economy in the mid-eighteenth century.These essays represent not only those areas where Hume's arguments representative of his age, but also where he is strikingly innovative. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (5)

My son loved this
My 18 year old suddenly became the philosopher and wanted to explore new thoughts. This is a good, thought provoking collection that he thoroughly enjoyed.

Move Over Montaigne
First, I am assuming the essays in the Oxford edition are sufficiently similar to the LibertyClassics edition (the latter a far more elegant paperback and includes "Essays Written and Withdrawn"). Second, these essays (including one on how to write one in the L/C edition) are more in the tradition of Montaigne, Marcus Arelius, and Emerson, to cite some exemplars of the tradition, meaning that these essays are not as logically rigorous as his "Treatise on Human Nature," "Essays Concerning Human Understanding," "Principles of Morals," and "Natural Religion," but are more an astute and empirical observation of what causes pleasure and satisfaction versus what causes discomfort and uneasiness. This emprical motif permeates all the essays.

The "moral" essays are a continuation of Vol. III of his "Treatise on Human Nature," and "Principles of Morals," and contribute to how our "tastes" and "utility," rather than apriori logic, delimit and describe moral ideas and ideals. His "political" essays are the most prominent among the group and are often prescient of subsequent developments, clearly anticipating a more democratic society, but they often come across as antediluvian, despite Hume's analytical dexterity and his compassionate motivation. The "literary" essays are the least in number and the most impotent of his contributions. Not that they lack value or interest, they simply lack novelty or new understanding. All his essays have an empirical bent, which should not surprise anyone familiar with Hume's other works.

Many of these 48 essays have perennial value, while others are clearly cotemporaneous with his time and place (mid-18th century England). In either case, they contribute to our understanding of the period, while making perspicacious observations about subjects that are both endearing and enduring. The LibertyClassics' edition uses current locution and spellings in Caslon 540 typeface on durable, acid-free paper, making Hume's lucid and elegant prose an even more attractive presentation. Highly recommended.

Excellent View of Hume
Hume is known today primarily for his seminal philosophical works.He regarded himself, however, as a man of letters who contributed to many areas and he was known best to his contemporaries as a historian.This nice collection of essays displays the breadth of Hume's interests and his well developed writing style.Hume was particularly interested in essays which would bring important topics before a broad public and wrote in an accessible and often entertaining style.Some of Hume's best known essays on philosophical and religous topics are included in this collection.What may be of greatest interest are some of the lesser known essays which display both the versatility and the power of Hume's intellect.Included are essays on economics and international trade, and also some political theory.Hume was an opponent of mercantilist ideas, supporting the largely correct notion that trade would enrich all parties.His political theory is particularly interesting.In contradistinction to the widely accepted ideas of the time, Hume suggested that republican governments could be stable if the size of the republic was large enough to encompass enough competing groups to prevent one from assuming complete control.It is known that James Madison read Hume in the period leading up to the Constitutional Convention and many scholars suspect that Hume's ideas were the germ of the defense of republicanism/federalism developed by Madison in the Federalist Papers.A momentous idea with momentous consequences.

Highly entertaining corpus of essays
Written in the highly polished Augustan prose style of the period, this is a fine selection of essays from the pen of the great Scottish philosopher, historian and economist, David Hume. The essays range from aesthetics, commerce, history and ethics, which include such pieces as "The Epicurean", "The Stoic" and "The Sceptic" (Hume's own credo) all which are rather curiously positioned and excellently written guides to living. "Of the Immortality of the Soul" and "Of Suicide", two of Hume's most controversial essays touching on theological topics, are also included in this volume. Both succeeded, with their bold, original arguments, in outraging the British clergy, which helps us to understand why Hume decided to have them published posthumously.

Fine selection of essays by a great man
This comparatively short book consists of extremely well-selected essays by the great Scottish philosopher and historian, on everything from public credit to delicacy of taste.Also included are the different classes of philosphers, including the class Hume falls under, The Sceptic (Hume's sp.).There is also an exceedingly interesting essay on the populousness of the world in ancient times.Apparently, the accepted notion at Hume's time was that there were hordes of people in ancient times and that our race has been dwindling ever since.Hume, on the other hand, proposes the radical notion that just the opposite is the case, and sets out to prove it quite handily.-Overall, the best introduction to one of my favorite writers that I've yet to read. ... Read more

Product Description
The History of England, Volume I is presented here in a high quality paperback edition. This popular classic work by David Hume is in the English language. If you enjoy the works of David Hume then we highly recommend this publication for your book collection. ... Read more

Product Description
The History of England in Three Volumes, Vol.I., Part F. - From Charles II. to James II. is presented here in a high quality paperback edition. This popular classic work by David Hume is in the English language. If you enjoy the works of David Hume then we highly recommend this publication for your book collection. ... Read more

Product Description

This is an electronic edition of the complete book complemented by author biography. This book features the table of contents linked to every part. The book was designed for optimal navigation on the Kindle, PDA, Smartphone, and other electronic readers. It is formatted to display on all electronic devices including the Kindle, Smartphones and other Mobile Devices with a small display.

Customer Reviews (10)

Even before Darwin, it was unreasonable to be a theist.
Personally, I rejected theism in response to just the sort of philosophical reasoning presented by Hume (though I hadn't read the dialogs themselves or the other essays in this collection until after my de-conversion).As important as evolution is, and as fascinating as critical scholarship of the Bible is, I really wish non-theists would lead with Hume while engaging in counter-apologetics.These arguments (even Hume's much maligned argument against believing that a miracle has occurred, which Anthony Flew defended quite adequately, in my view) require little to no specialized knowledge of history, ancient languages, physics or biology.They undermine the reasons that almost all theists, in my experience, give for believing in God: teleological arguments, cosmological arguments and arguments from miracles and religious experience.The dialogs are short, and even though the 18th century English may be a bit of a distraction to some folks, this is the text that I recommend to theists who want to seriously consider the case against belief in God.As the best of philosophical literature often does, the Dialogs present the opposition's own arguments powerfully (Cleanthes is a better apologist than W.L. Craig in my judgement.) even as it buries them.I'd challenge anyone to carefully and honestly consider Hume's case and remain a (non-fideistic) theist.

solid
got a good book for little but found it ironic that shipping was more expensive than the book all together, anyway good buy

One of those books often cited but not necessarily read
I think that ctdreyer's excellent review of Hume's Dialogues nicely encapsulates the purpose and issues in the book, and I agree wholeheartedly with his estimation of it.I'd like to raise two additional points here.

The first is that it's extraordinary that the latest generation of freethinkers--so-called "New Atheists" such as Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens--virtually ignore Dialogues.Each of them pays lip service to Hume as one of their own, but none of them gives any suggestion that they've actually read him.Daniel Dennett, another New Atheism prophet, discusses Hume in his Darwin's Dangerous Idea, but barely mentions him in his later explicit atheist text, Breaking the Spell.This is curious.

My second point is that the failure to discuss Hume may be curious, but isn't inexplicable.While I agree with ctdreyer's appraisal that Hume did a job on the argument from design, it's not at all clear from the Dialogues that Hume thinks the argument totally meritless.Even if it can't be philosophically demonstrated with a high degree of precision, Hume through Philo seems to say that it makes good sense to assume that a universe displaying some degree of intelligent design has a like cause.Hume isn't persuaded that the cause is personal or morally concerned.But he does seem to think that it is rational.This would make Hume a deist of sorts rather than a freethinker.

All of which raises the fascinating question of the relationship between the justifiability and the justification of God-belief.If Hume is correct, the former may not be necessary for the latter.Not exactly the fideistic position of the Dialogues' Demea, but not completely unrelated, either.

By the way:Richard Popkin's introduction to this edition of the Dialogues is excellent.It, along with the inexpensive cost, makes the Hackett edition my favorite.

Slender paperback stuffed with ideas
I bought this book for a class, and although we were only required to read sections of the book I ended up reading the entire thing, including the extra two essays (Immortality of the Soul & Suicide). The entire thing was extremely well-written and thought-provoking, even to a novice philosopher such as myself.

This isn't a book you can fly through. Hume requires the reader to slow down and really think about what is being said. The main section of the book (Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion) involves four characters, three discussing theories, and one student (technically the narrator) listening and occasionally commenting. By using this dialogue technique, Hume is able to present several sides of each argument in a unique way, and not simply expound his own theories. The method is most effective.

I won't go into depth of what this book discusses, the theory of design, arguments about God's nature and being, the argument from the existence of evil, and whether a posteriori or a priori arguments are best suited for proving God's existence. Overall this book is interesting and exciting, even for a 200 year old publication. Even if you're interested in modern philosophy, this book still offers some interesting theories. And obviously if you're interested in philosophy at all, it's a good book to check out for some history on the subject.

The introduction offers a good deal of information about the essays included in the book as well as Hume himself.

Classic statement of arguments against God's existence
While being a theist I do not accept Hume's conclusions, he is no doubt the finest philosophical skeptic in the West since the time of Sextus Empiricus.

Hume, the philosopher who woke Kant from his 'dogmatic slumbers', takes a very empirical approach to reality and philosophy.In Hume's mind, the pretensions of the human mind to certain truth and knowledge do not accord with the way things are.Many things are believed on insufficient evidence or sloppy thinking or for reasons of emotional need rather than on evidence and reason.The task he set himself was in many ways like that of Descartes, except unlike Descartes Hume did not believe that either the methods of science or God (Hume was an atheist) could give us grounds for certain knowledge.

The dialogues on Natural Religion are one of his supreme masterpieces.Published after his death, this dialogue features a conversation between two philosophers about the nature and existence of God and the proofs for his existence.One philosopher is a skeptic, Philo, and the other is a theist, Carneades.Demea the Deist provides a third interlocutor in the dialogue.Carneades states several popular arguments for God's existence in Hume's time, including the teleological argument, moral argument, and argument from design.Philo responds to this arguments, mostly using the argument from evil as well as appeals to the rule of regular law in nature, to refute ideas about miracles, providence, and evidential design from a supreme 'architect.'Hume states the counter-arguments in extremely powerful terms, essentially completely demolishing the position of Carnedes and concluding that at best, only a very weak inference can be made for God's existence from the structure of the world.

Hume's arguments have been recently re-stated by several atheist philosophers, including J.L. Mackie and Daniel Dennett.For Mackie, Hume was right in arguing theism is philosophical nonsense, and for Dennett, God is a redundant hypothesis when the order and beauty of the universe is readily and clearly explained by science, and at best a kind of Spinoza-style pantheism is where the sacred can enter into the cosmos.While I disagree, the adoption of Hume's arguments by many leading philosophers shows both the power, beauty and logical coherence of Hume's position, which should be read carefully by any philosopher who wants to offer a rational proof that God exists.

For me it is not the order but the beauty of the universe which suggests God exists, but perhaps for others this beauty is marred too much by suffering and evil to come to such a conclusion, and Hume would surely agree. ... Read more

Product Description
One of the most significant works of Western philosophy, Hume's Treatise was published in 1739-40, before he was thirty years old. A pinnacle of English empiricism, it is a comprehensive attempt to apply scientific methods of observation to a study of human nature, and a vigorous attack upon the principles of traditional metaphysical thought. With masterly eloquence, Hume denies the immortality of the soul and the reality of space; considers the manner in which we form concepts of identity, cause and effect; and speculates upon the nature of freedom, virtue and emotion. Opposed both to metaphysics and to rationalism, Hume's philosophy of informed scepticism sees man not as a religious creation, nor as a machine, but as a creature dominated by sentiment, passion and appetite. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (32)

Reason is the slave of the passions
I read this book for a graduate seminar on ethics.Hume's Treatise of Human Nature along with his staunch empirical approach to epistemology, has garnered him recognition as a "great skeptic" of the rationalist tradition in philosophy and recognition as the greatest philosopher to write in English.Hume's ethical project is concerned with discovering how people's nature dictates moral behavior and in discovering the moral virtues that society deems useful.Hume separates himself from the classical Greek notion of how an agent acts virtuously when he posits his thesis that people are incapable of using reason to sway their emotions or substantially influence their wills."I shall endeavour to prove first, that reason alone can never be a motive to any action of the will; and secondly, that it can never oppose passion in the direction of the will."((T, 2.3.3).Hume's theory regarding the process that agents use to act is a departure from the classical Greek model in that it relies on passion and is devoid of the idea of using practical reasoning to overcome feelings of fear to accomplish a noble end.For Hume, only a person's passions can choose their ends, and he denies that reason has the ability to evaluate their ends.(T, 3.1.1).Hume's notions on reason vastly contradicts the vast majority of ancient and modern philosophers' beliefs, regarding the amalgamation of human emotion and reason producing the practical reasoning to guide an agent to act.

Hume's anti-rationalist assertion that reason cannot be the major factor producing moral action provides the foundation for his entire ethical theory.In essence, Hume uses a causality argument to explain virtues and vices and what motivates people to make moral choices.Hume argues that what moves people are sentiments of pleasure, such as, pride or love, or pain, such as humility or hatred, as they either observe actions by others or contemplate performing acts of their own."In every case, therefore, we must judge of the one by the other; and may pronounce any quality of the mind virtuous, which causes love or pride; and any one vicious, which causes hatred or humility."(T, 3. 3. 1).Hume adopts a subjective view to morality.He argues that one cannot use reason or science to deduce "truths" in ethics.Actions are deemed virtuous by a particular society through judgments of approval or distaste of people's sentiments when observing or contemplating a particular action.With this ethical model, Hume posits the notion that there are only two types of virtues, "natural" and "artificial," and that courage is a natural virtue since it brings the pleasurable sentiment of praise and pride to the one who acts courageously.

Hume leaves very little if any room for reason to either direct the people will, or even work in conjunction with people passions or emotions to form any kind of practical reasoning a person can rely on to guide them on a path to ethical behavior.

Reason is the slave of the passions
I read this book for a graduate seminar on ethics.Hume's Treatise of Human Nature along with his staunch empirical approach to epistemology, has garnered him recognition as a "great skeptic" of the rationalist tradition in philosophy and recognition as the greatest philosopher to write in English.Hume's ethical project is concerned with discovering how people's nature dictates moral behavior and in discovering the moral virtues that society deems useful.Hume separates himself from the classical Greek notion of how an agent acts virtuously when he posits his thesis that people are incapable of using reason to sway their emotions or substantially influence their wills."I shall endeavour to prove first, that reason alone can never be a motive to any action of the will; and secondly, that it can never oppose passion in the direction of the will."((T, 2.3.3).Hume's theory regarding the process that agents use to act is a departure from the classical Greek model in that it relies on passion and is devoid of the idea of using practical reasoning to overcome feelings of fear to accomplish a noble end.For Hume, only a person's passions can choose their ends, and he denies that reason has the ability to evaluate their ends.(T, 3.1.1).Hume's notions on reason vastly contradicts the vast majority of ancient and modern philosophers' beliefs, regarding the amalgamation of human emotion and reason producing the practical reasoning to guide an agent to act.

Hume's anti-rationalist assertion that reason cannot be the major factor producing moral action provides the foundation for his entire ethical theory.In essence, Hume uses a causality argument to explain virtues and vices and what motivates people to make moral choices.Hume argues that what moves people are sentiments of pleasure, such as, pride or love, or pain, such as humility or hatred, as they either observe actions by others or contemplate performing acts of their own."In every case, therefore, we must judge of the one by the other; and may pronounce any quality of the mind virtuous, which causes love or pride; and any one vicious, which causes hatred or humility."(T, 3. 3. 1).Hume adopts a subjective view to morality.He argues that one cannot use reason or science to deduce "truths" in ethics.Actions are deemed virtuous by a particular society through judgments of approval or distaste of people's sentiments when observing or contemplating a particular action.With this ethical model, Hume posits the notion that there are only two types of virtues, "natural" and "artificial," and that courage is a natural virtue since it brings the pleasurable sentiment of praise and pride to the one who acts courageously.

Hume leaves very little if any room for reason to either direct the people will, or even work in conjunction with people passions or emotions to form any kind of practical reasoning a person can rely on to guide them on a path to ethical behavior.

Reason is the slave of the passions
I read this book for a graduate seminar on ethics.Hume's Treatise of Human Nature along with his staunch empirical approach to epistemology, has garnered him recognition as a "great skeptic" of the rationalist tradition in philosophy and recognition as the greatest philosopher to write in English.Hume's ethical project is concerned with discovering how people's nature dictates moral behavior and in discovering the moral virtues that society deems useful.Hume separates himself from the classical Greek notion of how an agent acts virtuously when he posits his thesis that people are incapable of using reason to sway their emotions or substantially influence their wills."I shall endeavour to prove first, that reason alone can never be a motive to any action of the will; and secondly, that it can never oppose passion in the direction of the will."((T, 2.3.3).Hume's theory regarding the process that agents use to act is a departure from the classical Greek model in that it relies on passion and is devoid of the idea of using practical reasoning to overcome feelings of fear to accomplish a noble end.For Hume, only a person's passions can choose their ends, and he denies that reason has the ability to evaluate their ends.(T, 3.1.1).Hume's notions on reason vastly contradicts the vast majority of ancient and modern philosophers' beliefs, regarding the amalgamation of human emotion and reason producing the practical reasoning to guide an agent to act.

Hume's anti-rationalist assertion that reason cannot be the major factor producing moral action provides the foundation for his entire ethical theory.In essence, Hume uses a causality argument to explain virtues and vices and what motivates people to make moral choices.Hume argues that what moves people are sentiments of pleasure, such as, pride or love, or pain, such as humility or hatred, as they either observe actions by others or contemplate performing acts of their own."In every case, therefore, we must judge of the one by the other; and may pronounce any quality of the mind virtuous, which causes love or pride; and any one vicious, which causes hatred or humility."(T, 3. 3. 1).Hume adopts a subjective view to morality.He argues that one cannot use reason or science to deduce "truths" in ethics.Actions are deemed virtuous by a particular society through judgments of approval or distaste of people's sentiments when observing or contemplating a particular action.With this ethical model, Hume posits the notion that there are only two types of virtues, "natural" and "artificial," and that courage is a natural virtue since it brings the pleasurable sentiment of praise and pride to the one who acts courageously.

Hume leaves very little if any room for reason to either direct the people will, or even work in conjunction with people passions or emotions to form any kind of practical reasoning a person can rely on to guide them on a path to ethical behavior.

Reason is the slave of the passions
I read this book for a graduate seminar on ethics.Hume's Treatise of Human Nature along with his staunch empirical approach to epistemology, has garnered him recognition as a "great skeptic" of the rationalist tradition in philosophy and recognition as the greatest philosopher to write in English.Hume's ethical project is concerned with discovering how people's nature dictates moral behavior and in discovering the moral virtues that society deems useful.Hume separates himself from the classical Greek notion of how an agent acts virtuously when he posits his thesis that people are incapable of using reason to sway their emotions or substantially influence their wills."I shall endeavour to prove first, that reason alone can never be a motive to any action of the will; and secondly, that it can never oppose passion in the direction of the will."((T, 2.3.3).Hume's theory regarding the process that agents use to act is a departure from the classical Greek model in that it relies on passion and is devoid of the idea of using practical reasoning to overcome feelings of fear to accomplish a noble end.For Hume, only a person's passions can choose their ends, and he denies that reason has the ability to evaluate their ends.(T, 3.1.1).Hume's notions on reason vastly contradicts the vast majority of ancient and modern philosophers' beliefs, regarding the amalgamation of human emotion and reason producing the practical reasoning to guide an agent to act.

Hume's anti-rationalist assertion that reason cannot be the major factor producing moral action provides the foundation for his entire ethical theory.In essence, Hume uses a causality argument to explain virtues and vices and what motivates people to make moral choices.Hume argues that what moves people are sentiments of pleasure, such as, pride or love, or pain, such as humility or hatred, as they either observe actions by others or contemplate performing acts of their own."In every case, therefore, we must judge of the one by the other; and may pronounce any quality of the mind virtuous, which causes love or pride; and any one vicious, which causes hatred or humility."(T, 3. 3. 1).Hume adopts a subjective view to morality.He argues that one cannot use reason or science to deduce "truths" in ethics.Actions are deemed virtuous by a particular society through judgments of approval or distaste of people's sentiments when observing or contemplating a particular action.With this ethical model, Hume posits the notion that there are only two types of virtues, "natural" and "artificial," and that courage is a natural virtue since it brings the pleasurable sentiment of praise and pride to the one who acts courageously.

Hume leaves very little if any room for reason to either direct the people will, or even work in conjunction with people passions or emotions to form any kind of practical reasoning a person can rely on to guide them on a path to ethical behavior.

Reason is the slave of the passions
I read this book for a graduate seminar on ethics.Hume's Treatise of Human Nature along with his staunch empirical approach to epistemology, has garnered him recognition as a "great skeptic" of the rationalist tradition in philosophy and recognition as the greatest philosopher to write in English.Hume's ethical project is concerned with discovering how people's nature dictates moral behavior and in discovering the moral virtues that society deems useful.Hume separates himself from the classical Greek notion of how an agent acts virtuously when he posits his thesis that people are incapable of using reason to sway their emotions or substantially influence their wills."I shall endeavour to prove first, that reason alone can never be a motive to any action of the will; and secondly, that it can never oppose passion in the direction of the will."((T, 2.3.3).Hume's theory regarding the process that agents use to act is a departure from the classical Greek model in that it relies on passion and is devoid of the idea of using practical reasoning to overcome feelings of fear to accomplish a noble end.For Hume, only a person's passions can choose their ends, and he denies that reason has the ability to evaluate their ends.(T, 3.1.1).Hume's notions on reason vastly contradicts the vast majority of ancient and modern philosophers' beliefs, regarding the amalgamation of human emotion and reason producing the practical reasoning to guide an agent to act.

Hume's anti-rationalist assertion that reason cannot be the major factor producing moral action provides the foundation for his entire ethical theory.In essence, Hume uses a causality argument to explain virtues and vices and what motivates people to make moral choices.Hume argues that what moves people are sentiments of pleasure, such as, pride or love, or pain, such as humility or hatred, as they either observe actions by others or contemplate performing acts of their own."In every case, therefore, we must judge of the one by the other; and may pronounce any quality of the mind virtuous, which causes love or pride; and any one vicious, which causes hatred or humility."(T, 3. 3. 1).Hume adopts a subjective view to morality.He argues that one cannot use reason or science to deduce "truths" in ethics.Actions are deemed virtuous by a particular society through judgments of approval or distaste of people's sentiments when observing or contemplating a particular action.With this ethical model, Hume posits the notion that there are only two types of virtues, "natural" and "artificial," and that courage is a natural virtue since it brings the pleasurable sentiment of praise and pride to the one who acts courageously.

Hume leaves very little if any room for reason to either direct the people will, or even work in conjunction with people passions or emotions to form any kind of practical reasoning a person can rely on to guide them on a path to ethical behavior.
... Read more

Product Description
The History of England in Three Volumes, Vol.I., Part A. - From the Britons of Early Times to King John is presented here in a high quality paperback edition. This popular classic work by David Hume is in the English language. If you enjoy the works of David Hume then we highly recommend this publication for your book collection. ... Read more

Product 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, this excellent life story is now reissued in paperback, in response to an overwhelming interest in Hume's brilliant ideas. Containing more than a simple biography, this exemplary work is also a study of intellectual reaction in the eighteenth century. In this new edition are a detailed bibliography, index, and textual supplements, making it the perfect text for scholars and advanced students of Hume, epistemology, and the history of philosophy. It is also ideal for historians and literary scholars working on the eighteenth century, and for anyone with an interest in philosophy. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (4)

ONE OF THE BEST, PERHAPS THE BEST, BIOGRAPHY OF HUME
Ernest Campbell Mossner was an English professor at the University of Texas at Austin. His biography of the Scottish empiricist and skeptical philosopher David Hume is perhaps the best and most detailed available.

Mossner notes that "Hume was the first distinguished man of letters in Britain to make a fortune from literature alone," and adds that "The young Boswell in 1762 had no hesitation in naming Hume as 'the greatest Writer in Britain.'"(Later in life, Boswell wrote, "Were it not for his infidel writings, every body would love him.He is a plain, obliging, kindhearted man.")

Concerning Hume's reputation as an infidel, "The religous beliefs of David Hume were probably lost while he was at college or shortly thereafter."Mossner notes that "it is also clear that those religious beliefs were relinquished under philosophical pressure---that Hume reasoned himself out of religion."Nevertheless, he was no polemical writer.In his own brief autobiography, Hume noted, "I had fixed a Resolution, which I inflexibly maintained, never to reply to any body; and not being very irascible in my Temper, I have easily kept myself clear of all literary Squabbles."

About Hume's famous The History of England (1826), Mossner writes, "What Hume had given the world in his 'History of England' was a broad, sweeping narrative of the national developments, philosophically coherent, artistically ordered, and pre-eminently readable.He made no pretense of 'research' scholarship but anticipated the modern synthetic historian in uniting and enlivening the sometimes ponderous research of others."

Mossner covers the famous dispute between Hume and Rousseau, after which Hume sighed, "my affair with Rousseau is now finally and totally at an end, at least on my part: for I never surely shall publish another line on that subject."Mossner notes that "In general, the world agreed that Hume had acted the part of a benevolent and virtuous friend..."

Mossner observes that "David Hume in later life, in Italy, and France, and Scotland, was to prove himself a man of normal sexual desires."Late in life, "He continued to enjoy ... the company of attractive adn vivacious women, and in his autobiography was to write with studied understatement that, 'as I took a particular Pleasure in the company of modest women, I had no reason to be displeased with the Reception I met with from them."

Hume was a well-loved person. "Hume's jests with intimate friends are legion and his letters are replete with wit and with witticisms.The topic of his own obesity ... became a perennial favorite," and "the French found Hume to be truly le bon David: and their original admiration for his intellect was consequently augmented by affection for his person."

Mossner concludes by saying that "There can, likewise, be no doubt that in his life he followed admirably his own caution: 'Be a philosopher, but amidst all your philosophy, be still a man.'"

This book is ESSENTIAL READING for anyone interested in Hume, philosophy, or the lives of philosophers.

Great book (but lousy printing)
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
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
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. ... Read more

Product Description
David Hume's An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, first published in 1748, is a concise statement of Hume's central philosophical positions. It develops an account of human mental functioning which emphasizes the limits of human knowledge and the extent of our reliance on (non-rational) mental habits. It then applies that account to questions of free will and religious knowledge before closing with a defence of moderate scepticism. Thisvolume, which presents a modified version of the definitive 1772 edition of the work, offers helpful annotation for the student reader, together with an introduction that sets this profoundly influential work in its philosophical and historical contexts. The volume also includes a selection of other works by Hume that throw light on both the circumstances of the work's genesis and its key themes and arguments. ... Read more

Product Description
The first thematically arranged collection of Hume's political writings, this new work brings together substantive selections from "A Treatise on Human Nature", "An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals", and "Essays: Moral, Political and Literary", with an interpretive introduction placing Hume in the context of contemporary debates between liberalism and its critics and between contextual and universal approaches. ... Read more

Product Description

This is an electronic edition of the complete book complemented by author biography. This book features the table of contents linked to every part. The book was designed for optimal navigation on the Kindle, PDA, Smartphone, and other electronic readers. It is formatted to display on all electronic devices including the Kindle, Smartphones and other Mobile Devices with a small display.

Product Description
Reprinted from the posthumous edition of 1777 and edited with introduction, comparative tables of contents, and analytical index by L. A. Selby-Bigge. Third edition with text revised and notes by P. H. Nidditch. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (4)

Hume at his best
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
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 .
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 anddelightful to read was on moral distinctions (right and wrong). This isserious stuff. If you take the time to understand Hume, you certainly willnot be wasting your time.

Fascinating asymmetrical paradigmatically-oriented concept
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. ... Read more

Product Description
This book was converted from its physical edition to the digital format by a community of volunteers. You may find it for free on the web. Purchase of the Kindle edition includes wireless delivery. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

Excellent Kindle edition
This is one of the most impressive free kindle editions of a book that I have read.It is taken from a 1902 printing (a 2nd edition) that was reprinted from the posthumous edition of 1777.It includes endnotes and an extensive index put together by L.A Selby-Bigge, a late fellow of University College, Oxford.There is a table of contents at the beginning with hyperlinks.The endnotes also have hyperlinks, which makes it easy to read the notes and jump back to the text.The index also has hyperlinks.This is the first kindle freebie that I have seen with these features.This is handy for this type of book.Note that Hume is Scottish and the book was originally written in English.

I have always had an interest in philosophy and history and finally got around to reading this foundational work.The title describes exactly what this book is about.Hume starts by giving a brief introduction to philosophy and then jumps into the main questions.The biggie is where do ideas come from?How do we understand things?What is instinct, inspiration?It is interesting that his answers to these questions still hold up well to modern thought.

Hume wrote this book at a time and place where Calvinism still held great sway and God was thought to be behind every thought and action.His ideas were radical and I was interested to see how he tried to delicately handle ideas that would potentially offend many of his readers.

I highly recommend this seminal work to any one interested in philosophy and enjoys stretching their minds a bit.This is something I will refer to often.I continue to enjoy the access my Kindle gives me to great classics like this. ... Read more

Product Description
The book has no illustrations or index. Purchasers are entitled to a free trial membership in the General Books Club where they can select from more than a million books without charge. Subjects: Knowledge, Theory of; Ethics; ... Read more

Customer Reviews (15)

Human Understanding -- if not by logic, how does Hume "know" all this?
After his three-volume Treatise of Human Nature dropped like a rock to the bottom of the pool of British philosophic writing, Hume set out to write a briefer, more accessible version -- the Enquiry concerning Human Understanding. One of the early points it makes is that most endeavors to write about the nature of thought are hopeless and nearly impossible to understand. With that disclaimer, Hume sets out to contradict himself by writing lucidly about, while candidly acknowledging the severe limits of, this topic. He uses logic to show that most human understanding falls into two categories: a very small group of innate truths deducible by logic, like every triangle has three sides, and a much larger group -- nearly everything we "know" -- which is based on reality-based observation. This latter group always has, at a fundamental level, an element of probabilistic assumption: Things customarily happened this way before, so they probably will again. Thus almost everything we (think we) know about the world is based on empirical experience, not pure logic. So . . .how did he figure this all out?

Not An Ending, But A Beginning
This review mostly concerns the Enquiry.The Letter is primarily a defense of Hume's earlier Treatise of Human Nature, while his Abstract is an anonymous review of the Treatise.It strikes me as very funny, though not surprising, that Hume would review his own work.Funny because any author would give his right arm to get at least one favorable review when all the other critics are completely missing its point.Unsurprising because Hume was probably one of the only people alive at that time who could truly grasp all the facets of his radical philosophical claims.

The Enquiry was written after the Treatise.Hume, though he claimed the opposite, seems never to have really recovered from the blow he took from seeing his Treatise "fall dead born from the press."As a result, his Enquiry is far more cautious in the steps it takes.(For those of you who have read both, yes, I swear, Hume IS more cautious.Compare the claims.)A more robust philosophical stance is taken in his Treatise, while a more focused stance is taken in his Enquiry.

The Enquiry is mainly a work of epistemology and as such, scrutinizes our methods of acquiring knowledge.Making perhaps the most radical (and poignant) claim in all of modern philosophy, it posits, and supports, that there is NO causation, only conjunction.That, for example, when we see a glass drop and break, we cannot say we know gravity caused this (in the way we know two plus two equals four).All we see is constant conjunction.The connection is lacking, i.e., it is not inconceivable that the glass wouldn't bounce, turn to ash, or dissolve into sand (the way it is inconceivable that two plus two equals five).This, in effect, nullifies all the so called "laws" of nature that are formed by science.(Note that this does not state that there are no laws of nature, just that we really can never make the claim that we ever really know there are laws of nature.)

This could be thought of as the philosophical shot heard round the world.Agree or disagree, Hume must be answered.Hume has historically been charged with creating an intellectual and philosophical cul-de-sac with his skepticism.To paraphrase Bertrand Russell, Hume makes a claim which none can refute, but at the same time one which none can accept.In effect, Hume's philosophy seems to bind the human mind, stopping its journey of discovery and ultimately accomplishing what his predecessor, John Locke, set out to do, i.e., map the extent of human knowledge.

However, where one may see Hume's philosophy as shackles and fetters in the search for truth, one could also equally see his philosophy as liberation.Implicit in his philosophy is the idea that ANYTHING is possible.There are no shackles, no fetters, no limits; only those that we create for ourselves.Our limits are self-imposed, constructs of our observance (and inference) of connection.In this way Hume appears in the same light as the Eastern masters seeing that reality is not what we have (through experiential knowledge) believed it to be.It is something much more wondrous.In Zen, our causal thinking is the only barrier between the person and enlightenment.Hume could be seen as implying that when the idea of causality is removed, with only conjunction remaining in its place, the state of true knowledge and wisdom (true zen) is achieved.

This, of course, is only idle speculation.But it is stated so as to demonstrate the richness and immense possibility Hume's philosophy possesses when seen in the correct light.Instead of saying, "Nothing is certain," after reading Hume, one can say, with equal validity, "Anything is possible."The first statement approaches philosophy with despair.The second approaches it with a sense of childlike wonder and hope at the immense possibilities of reality.It approaches life as a beginning, not an ending.It approaches life as the philosopher approaches it.

Descartes' Ultimate Error
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
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
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 whereskepticism 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. ... Read more

Product Description
Four classic works by David Hume with an active table of contents.

Works include:
Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion
An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding
The History of England: From the Invasion of Julius Caesar to the Revolution in 1688
A Treatise of Human Nature ... Read more

Product Description
David Hume is one of the most provocative philosophers to have written in English.His Dialogues ask if a belief in God can be inferred from what is known of the universe, or whether such a belief is even consistent with such knowledge.The Natural History of Religion investigates the origins of belief, and follows its development from polytheism to dogmatic monotheism. Together, these works constitute the most formidable attack upon religious belief ever mounted by a philosopher.
This new edition includes Section XI of The Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding and a letter by Hume in which he discusses Dialogues. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (10)

Immortal philosopher
Hume was such a brilliant and complex thinker and widely read in both classical and contemporary literature. I found at major junctures of his arguments remarkable coincidence with my own independent ratiocinations when I first flirted with non-theism as a teenager, such as virtually all his reasonings against teleological arguments and on the development of monotheism from 'idolatry' (Hume's frequent term for polytheism.) So for me reading Hume is especially endearing. His prose is a piece of work, but becomes naturally stylish and attractive after feeling it up. The introduction, notes, and abstracts by the editor, Gaskin, are helpful.

In addition to the 'Dialogues' and 'The Natural History of Religion' is an excerpt from 'An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding' and a short autobiographical missive written shortly before Hume's death.

Great book!
This is a great book. Required for my class. You can probably find this book a few bucks cheaper. I rather pay the extra dough and save on time and hassle wasted like waiting in line during the beginning days of school or waiting for the auction to end or hoping the seller ships your book to get it beforethe beginning weeks of class. Just save time and sanity and purchase from amazon.

Dynamite
How lucky am I to have this namesake.

This work is dynamite.

Hume walks right in and starts slaying every Sacred Cow in the place.

Not one God is left standing when he's finished. This is like watching Darwin taking the secateurs to church. Richard Dawkins doesn't even come close to Hume's intellectual power or economy of thought. They are in completely different leagues.

The introduction to this particular compilation paints a wonderful portrait of a man who deserves far more attention than he has received.

Erudite, clever, intellectually unassailable.

Apologists are left with nothing.

This work should be required reading for every school age child in the world.

It's fine to believe, but know what you're believing first.

Hume will take you there.

A Must,A Classic, etc.
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
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.
... Read more

Product Description
This book was converted from its physical edition to the digital format by a community of volunteers. You may find it for free on the web. Purchase of the Kindle edition includes wireless delivery. ... Read more

Product Description
In professing to call attention to this often forgotten work of the great Scottish philosopher, cue cannot help noticing how very similar the reception accorded to it by the outside world has been to its treatment at the hands of this author himself. During his lifetime lie kept it in the safe obscurity of his Htudy drawer, where it lay until the day of his death. Tin; plan of the Dialogues had been clearly thought out by Hume as early us 1750, and the active period of his contribution to philosophy proper having closed almost in the same year, this excursion of his into natural theology might most fitly have been presented to his readers at once, especially if, as it seems to us now, it may be rightly regarded as the crown and consummation of his earlier speculations. Indeed some such

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION vii; DIALOGUES-; ???? I 6; ? II26; , III4Í); ? IV 60; V72; il VIöl; 11 VII92; ? VIII??; ?IX 114; X 123; «XL 142; ir XII 164

About the Publisher

Forgotten Books is a publisher of historical writings, such as: Philosophy, Classics, Science, Religion, History, Folklore and Mythology.

Forgotten Books' Classic Reprint Series utilizes the latest technology to regenerate facsimiles of historically important writings. Careful attention has been made to accurately preserve the original format of each page whilst digitally enhancing the difficult to read text. Read books online for free at http://www.forgottenbooks.org ... Read more

Customer Reviews (12)

Essential reading; confrontation is not a bad thing
To be a philosophical Sceptic is, in a man of letters, the first and most essential step towards being a sound, believing Christian...

With this nearly-closing sentence, David Hume clearly lays out his principle of skepticism in a time when atheism was enough to get you ostracized if not physically expelled from society. These words come from the mouth of Seneca, one of the numerous fictional characters in Hume's Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, a short work of philosophical fiction. The work follows the lengthy conversations of several philosophers and a student.

The work is simply required reading for any Christian -- or secularist -- who is willing to go beyond credal and even blind belief in any god, let alone the Triune God of the Bible. Hume positions three key personas -- Philo, Cleanthes, and Demea -- in a verbal sparring match, winds them up, and lets them go.

The principal discussion? Is there a God, is he active in the universe or Deistic, and can we know him. Philo most often represents Hume's position, reasoning first to deism, second to skepticism, and finally suggesting a brand of atheism that even in fiction, rings of Hume's later, bolder works.

So why read 100 pages of fictional philosophy if you know what you believe, Christian, theist, or deist? Because it's intellectually dishonest to not throw your beliefs into the fire of testing. Further, for most who believe against God, they can no more elucidate their arguments than they can define existentialism. But even more, for the Christian, why the cowardice to see your (our) God confronted? Why not a willingness to subject him to examination, much as Job did, and repent when we realize how much further and greater his depths are than when we first imagined.

In fact, from the tongues of the skeptical Hume come this brilliance:

To know God, says Seneca, is to worship him.

Simple, yes, but profound. There is a suggestion here, from Hume's lips, that Christians and theists have it wrong. In an attempt to relate ourselves to God and his character, we have stretched morality and squeezed it into religion and even Christianity. Rather, as even Hume suggests through Seneca, we must worship God, not behavioristic ideals.

This book will stretch and frustrate both Christian and atheist. In the process, though, is depth of understanding. A willingness to engage the opposite side only strengthens abelief, or reveals it to be a puny paper-thin thing. Why not engage, and see if, indeed, God is not willing to be worshiped, and in fact desirous of just that?

To Hume it may concern
"When men are most sure and arrogant they are commonly most mistaken, giving views to passion without that proper deliberation which alone can secure them from the grossest absurdities"-David Hume

As an empiricist, who believes only in knowledge based on experience, Hume explores whether it is possible to arrive at any rational, definitive conclusions about God's nature. By using dialogues against beliefs in God that are based on arguments by design; Hume concludes that religious belief can in no way be based on reason.
In "Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion"; three main characters are used to explore God's nature; each character represents a philosophical position:

1. Cleanthes, representing empirical theism; argues that we can prove God's nature/existence from clues in nature. Through the use of argument from design that works by way of analogy; we examine the complex/ordered/intelligent universe we live in and conclude that it has a complex/intelligent creator
2. Demea, representing Fideism through religious orthodoxy; simply rejects the possibility of even comprehending God's nature through human reason.
Demea sees philosophical skepticism as the first crucial step toward Christianity, by undermining one's trust in reason and opening one up to pure faith.
3. Philo, representing philosophical skepticism; agrees with Demea that God is incomprehensible. Philo rejects the argument from design that appears to resemble argument by analogy; both arguments are at fault since there is nothing to be compared to the universe in such arguments, thus they are both at fault.
Just because the world is ordered, it is not necessarily a result of intelligence. Also nature itself doesn't give any evidence that God is infinite, perfect or even present. Therefore, even if the argument from design is accepted, it does not provide any definite information about God's nature.

When the theory of evil is presented by Philo, who questions God's moral attributes, given all the evil in the world and settles for the idea that God is morally neutral, the dialogues get very interesting. It even gets more intriguing when Philo, as do many philosophers, attacks organized religions as morally and psychologically harmful, and argues that the only true religion that should be accepted is a philosophical belief in some higher power.

Hume reaches the conclusion that there can be no rational basis for any religious belief. Neither reason nor experience can justify a belief in God's nature. Knowing that Hume is strictly an atheist, I felt he wanted to attack all three points of view. Still, it is very hard to decide Hume's true opinion through the dialogues.
Whether the reader will agree with some or none of the philosophical ideas in this work, I think that the true genius remains in the uncertainty that Hume leads the reader into by questioning each and every idea.

Apologetics Concerning the Nature of Religion
Apologetics Concerning the Nature of Religion

Apologetics or is it antiapologetics, I have read Hodges arguments about cause and effect, primary and secondary causes in his work on systematic theology which was written a hundred years after this work. RC Sproulamong others discuss similar issues today with a contrary conclusion. David Hume's dialogue about the existence of God and the attributes of God does form some of the frame work for further philosophic and theological discussion. Some seems quite aimless like his discussion whether God is wholly other. Some theologians may make this statement and argument, but this certainly is not fundamentalist or scriptural perspective of God. What I found most interesting in this work is his discussion of causality. Mr. Hume's focus was on Natural theology or the idea that God could be perceived or not perceived through nature. But also included was knowing God through rationalization. To this he compared three notions:

{1} That there is a self existent Being who always existed, never created, and is the ultimate Cause of the whole universe. Something that never was caused, but is the cause of all else.

{2}That there is no ultimate cause. History is an infinite amount of causes and effects that has no starts or ends. Matter in some form has always existed and matter has always been in motion. Universe or galaxy may have a point of beginning, but not what it is composed of.

{3}At a point in time there was no matter, then at another point of time there was matter. The matter move in motion to develop things as we know it.

David Hume does not discuss the concept that simply nothing really exists. I would guess in an earlier work he had dismissed it in some form. It is my conclusion Mr. Hume found point one as absurd as point 2 or 3.

The other major focus of discussion in this work how an all knowing creator, who has all power, and has the capacity to perceive every thing that is going on can create a world that has the highest being of creation suffer pain and evil among each other. The argument is made in this work that the universe does not function in a rational manner, therefore such all knowing, all powerful and all powerful God does not seem to exist. Some reviewers consider it a complete debunk of intelligent design and it certainly a source of comfort for those who do desire.

Does God exist?
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.

Is God Knowable By Reason?

David Hume made a reputation by writing on reason and its limits. The main thrust of the Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion isto question whether theological arguments for God that assign Him positive attributes (omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent, etc.) go beyond reason's limits in assigning these attributes. We watch Cleanthes (believer in theological arguments), Demea (believer more on faith) and Philo (disbeliever in theology's efficacy) hash out whether reason and experience alone give us reason to say anything whatever about God.

Hume explores all of the major arguments for God's existence. First, the a posteriori argument is explored; the argument that just as seeing a house gives us reason to assume an architect and builder, seeing the world should give us reason to infer a designer. Hume (through the skeptical voice of Philo) sees much wrong with this argument. Why? Because the reason we infer a builder for a house is because experience has shown us that houses have builders, thus when we see a house, we assume that, like other houses we've seen, this one too has a builder. But experience does not tell us that where there is a world, there is a designer. The leap is extra-experiential. Further, even if we DID infer a designer, why infer just one? Houses have construction crews of multiple people; if we analogize between the house and the world, then why not infer that the world, too, might have infinite creators? (And why infer that the world's creator is omnipotent, if all that is needed to create something is to be more powerful than the thing created - no more, no less?)

Next, we go through the a priori argument - the argument from first cause. Hume (Philo) is quick to point out the obvious flaw with this. If everything needs a cause, then what caused God? If God is said to be eternally existing, then why couldn't the natural world - rather than God - be thought eternal instead? And further, why is a infinite chain of causes and effects so unimaginable, anyhow? (Isn't it just as sensical as an eternalGod itself not caused?)

Lastly, Philo brings up the argument from evil. In a nutshell, Philo suggests that while theology sees all the perfections of the world, proclaiming them clear evidence of remarkable design, theologians dismiss or downplay the imperfections. If God is said to all-good Himself, then why did he create humans with such flaws? (one assumes that an all-powerful, all-good God could have avoided those errors).

Still, the main thrust of this book is that Philo, far from challenging whether God exists, challenges theologies capacity to assign ANY characteristics to God by reason and experience alone. Hume does a good job not only in outlaying arguments as to why reason is not capable of knowing a thing about God, but also in making believable dialogues (compared to Plato, whose characters are all made to be one-dimensional foils for "Socrates.") As in so many other areas, Hume was a pioneer in the realm of the philosophy of God. This book furnishes strong proof of that!
... Read more

Product Description
David Hume (1711-76) is one of the greatest figures in the history of British philosophy. Of all of Hume's writings, the philosophically most profound is undoubtedly his first, A Treatise on Human Nature. Hume on Morality introduces and assesses: Hume's life and the background of the Treatise; the ideas and text in the Treatise; and Hume's continuing importance to philosophy.

James Baillie provides us with a map to Books 2 and 3 of the Treatise, focusing on Hume's theory of the passions and morality. This book sets out its principal ideas and arguments of the Treatise in a clear and readable way and is ideal for anyone coming to Hume's work for the first time. ... Read more

Product Description
The History of England in Three Volumes, Vol.I., Part B. - From Henry III. to Richard III. is presented here in a high quality paperback edition. This popular classic work by David Hume is in the English language. If you enjoy the works of David Hume then we highly recommend this publication for your book collection. ... Read more