David Hume wants to explain to us a radical kind of skepticism in which the contents of our mind are described into two parts. The first part is impressions, the actual experiences that we have. For example, tasting an apple is an experience that we can have. The second part is ideas, copies of impressions in which we are remembering the taste of the apple. Renee Descartes view of the external world is through God because he is not a deceiver so material objects comes to existence. The idea of God must have a cause according to Descartes. Hume did not believe in a high power as Descartes did. They are both using their knowledge of mathematics. Hume uses mathematics through relations of ideas and Descartes uses it as an important property of
…show more content…
Descartes would say that God existence is A priori where Hume would disagree by explaining that any statement that claims the existence of something is always going to be an A posteriori claim. He was a rationalist who believes that truth about the world can be justified by reason alone. In Mediations 6, he proves the existence of corporal objects. He is certain that his ideas of corporal objects resemble genuine physical things in their mathematical respects. When corporal object exist is A priori statement this comes from the causal principle and the source of idea in Mediation …show more content…
Hume did not believe in a high power as Descartes did. Hume response to Descartes nothing exists without ideas by saying that nothing exists without impressions. Hume’s argument is an atheist point of view because of his non-beliefs about God. I agreed with Hume because of his view on cause and effect where we expect a constant conjunction to keep acquiring in the future. In addition, that knowledge derived from experience this is true because when you learn something is because you had, had experienced it before. They accepted that the “self” is a philosophical reflection. Hume ratifies Locke’s distinction between simple and complex ideas because complex ideas are composed of simpler ones. Descartes proves that God exits or at least an evil demon does. Both philosophers had very good arguments to defend each other and use similar
Descartes would say that God existence is A priori where Hume would disagree by explaining that any statement that claims the existence of something is always going to be an A posteriori claim. He was a rationalist who believes that truth about the world can be justified by reason alone. In Mediations 6, he proves the existence of corporal objects. He is certain that his ideas of corporal objects resemble genuine physical things in their mathematical respects. When corporal object exist is A priori statement this comes from the causal principle and the source of idea in Mediation …show more content…
Hume did not believe in a high power as Descartes did. Hume response to Descartes nothing exists without ideas by saying that nothing exists without impressions. Hume’s argument is an atheist point of view because of his non-beliefs about God. I agreed with Hume because of his view on cause and effect where we expect a constant conjunction to keep acquiring in the future. In addition, that knowledge derived from experience this is true because when you learn something is because you had, had experienced it before. They accepted that the “self” is a philosophical reflection. Hume ratifies Locke’s distinction between simple and complex ideas because complex ideas are composed of simpler ones. Descartes proves that God exits or at least an evil demon does. Both philosophers had very good arguments to defend each other and use similar