A Treatise Of Human Nature By Leibniz

Many philosophers have debated the question of truth. Can truth exist? Can it exist outside of context? Can we know anything? Philosophers from Leibniz to Hume have worked through these questions using rationalism or empiricism to guide their search for truth. Multiple conclusions have been reached by these philosophers. Therefore, the debate still continues. By exploring some of the arguments surrounding the debate, and putting them in a contemporary context it becomes easier to understand the opposing views and to make decisions about truth based upon them. Leibniz and Hume have two very different ideas when it comes to truth and knowledge. As a radical thinker, Leibniz uses logic and identity statements to build his claim for the existence …show more content…
Hume wrote “A Treatise of Human Nature” as a discourse of his ideas. From the very first page Hume claims that we cannot know anything. He explains, “ In examining several phenomena, we find that they resolve themselves into one common principle, and can trace this principle into another, we shall at least arrive at those few simple principles, on which all the rest depend. And tho’ we can never arrive at the ultimate principles, ‘tis a satisfaction to go as far as our faculties will allow us.” (Hume, 195) To put it simply, by looking at several instances through causality, we arrive at certain conclusions based upon what has occurred every time. However, we cannot find the truth or “ultimate principle” as he calls it, we can only go as far as our experiences, According to Hume, all human ideas and understanding come from the senses. He separates human experience into two categories of perception, ideas and impressions. Hume explains that impressions are “when we feel a passion or emotion of any kind, or have the images of external objects conveyed by our senses.” (Hume, 196) Impressions are for current experiences of the senses. Ideas on the other hand are thoughts without experiences or