Hume Essay
Relevant parts of Hume’s epistemology supposed that a man cannot determine the missing shade of blue (MSOB) without having experienced that shade. A Cartesian objection of Hume is that he will be able to combine the other shades while in defense of Hume you can argue that this shade is simply a compound idea connected by cause and effect.
Hume distinguishes between two mental states of the human mind which are Impressions and Ideas. Impressions are our direct lively perceptions of things we have experienced and Ideas are nothing more than less lively copies of your original impressions (Enquiry II). For instance when I am watching an NBA game on TV and see Steph Curry make a half court three-pointer that is an impression, me remembering …show more content…
All the objects of human reason or enquiry may naturally be divided into two kinds, to wit, Relations of ideas, and Matters of Fact (Enquiry IV). Hume views Relations of ideas to be the beliefs of the sciences of Math and everything that is intuitively or demonstratively certain. Hume views these beliefs to be attained by reasonings a priori; meaning they are discoverable by operation of thought without the need of experience. Hume views Matters of Fact as the beliefs that report the nature of things that are already in existent. All reasonings concerning Matter of Fact seem to be founded on the relation of Cause and Effect, and the knowledge of this relation arises entirely from experience (Enquiry IV). Hume supposed that the beliefs of Matters of Fact are attained by reasonings a posteriori; meaning that the knowledge of these beliefs come from evidence and observations. That any knowledge a man has of an object comes from constant conjunction of ideas and if presented with an entirely new object to which he has no experience, he will not be able to discover its causes and …show more content…
The Cartesian objection states valid arguments but lacks in the sense that shades are not numbers and their patterns are not certain. Hume’s epistemology proposes that anything known a priori is certain knowledge. In defense of Hume you can use the connection of ideas through cause and effect. The example used for this connection was that you throw a branch in a fire and the fire burns brighter. Each time you throw the branch into the fire the size and light emitted will be different while the idea in your mind will be from the impression of the previous outcomes (the idea in your head= n-1, n-2, . . . n-n, while the actual outcome = n) which is not the actual outcome. Having experienced the last outcome implies that the idea formed is from an experienced
Relevant parts of Hume’s epistemology supposed that a man cannot determine the missing shade of blue (MSOB) without having experienced that shade. A Cartesian objection of Hume is that he will be able to combine the other shades while in defense of Hume you can argue that this shade is simply a compound idea connected by cause and effect.
Hume distinguishes between two mental states of the human mind which are Impressions and Ideas. Impressions are our direct lively perceptions of things we have experienced and Ideas are nothing more than less lively copies of your original impressions (Enquiry II). For instance when I am watching an NBA game on TV and see Steph Curry make a half court three-pointer that is an impression, me remembering …show more content…
All the objects of human reason or enquiry may naturally be divided into two kinds, to wit, Relations of ideas, and Matters of Fact (Enquiry IV). Hume views Relations of ideas to be the beliefs of the sciences of Math and everything that is intuitively or demonstratively certain. Hume views these beliefs to be attained by reasonings a priori; meaning they are discoverable by operation of thought without the need of experience. Hume views Matters of Fact as the beliefs that report the nature of things that are already in existent. All reasonings concerning Matter of Fact seem to be founded on the relation of Cause and Effect, and the knowledge of this relation arises entirely from experience (Enquiry IV). Hume supposed that the beliefs of Matters of Fact are attained by reasonings a posteriori; meaning that the knowledge of these beliefs come from evidence and observations. That any knowledge a man has of an object comes from constant conjunction of ideas and if presented with an entirely new object to which he has no experience, he will not be able to discover its causes and …show more content…
The Cartesian objection states valid arguments but lacks in the sense that shades are not numbers and their patterns are not certain. Hume’s epistemology proposes that anything known a priori is certain knowledge. In defense of Hume you can use the connection of ideas through cause and effect. The example used for this connection was that you throw a branch in a fire and the fire burns brighter. Each time you throw the branch into the fire the size and light emitted will be different while the idea in your mind will be from the impression of the previous outcomes (the idea in your head= n-1, n-2, . . . n-n, while the actual outcome = n) which is not the actual outcome. Having experienced the last outcome implies that the idea formed is from an experienced