In his concise but very satisfying essay, “On the immorality of the Soul” Hume presents many sharp and brief arguments against considerations of afterlife. He offers them within three successive sections; moral, physical and metaphysical. He argues that there is no reason at all to think that the soul is immoral, except that the Bible says it is, so it must be true. But in reality, it is the gospel and the gospel alone that has brought life and immorality to light (Hume, 590).
Firstly, there are the metaphysical arguments, which claim that minds must be distinct from matter, and that this “spiritual substance” is of its nature indivisible and indestructible. These considerations chiefly target the rationalist project of establishing a mental …show more content…
So, “Matter … and spirit, are at bottom equally unknown, and we cannot determine what qualities inhere in the one or the other.” (Hume, 592). The physical substance of a person separates after death and loses its identity as a person. Why think that the mental substance would be any different? If there is a problem in how a substance can think, then the problem is not solved by simply claiming a thinking substance. If completed that easily, why not simply allow that physical matter is also a thinking substance? (Hume, 591). If the body rots, disperses and ceases to be human, why not think the same about the soul? If one was to reply by saying that mental substances are simple and immortal, for Hume, this implies that they would also be non-generable, and should not come into being either. If this were true, we should have memories of our births, which we don’t (Hume, 592). “The soul therefore if immortal, existed before our birth; and if the former existence no ways concerned us, neither will the latter.” (Hume, 592). Here, Hume is seen drawing on his considerations against miracles; constantly rejecting the possibility of a system whereby God continuously brings souls into existence. Finally, if the
Firstly, there are the metaphysical arguments, which claim that minds must be distinct from matter, and that this “spiritual substance” is of its nature indivisible and indestructible. These considerations chiefly target the rationalist project of establishing a mental …show more content…
So, “Matter … and spirit, are at bottom equally unknown, and we cannot determine what qualities inhere in the one or the other.” (Hume, 592). The physical substance of a person separates after death and loses its identity as a person. Why think that the mental substance would be any different? If there is a problem in how a substance can think, then the problem is not solved by simply claiming a thinking substance. If completed that easily, why not simply allow that physical matter is also a thinking substance? (Hume, 591). If the body rots, disperses and ceases to be human, why not think the same about the soul? If one was to reply by saying that mental substances are simple and immortal, for Hume, this implies that they would also be non-generable, and should not come into being either. If this were true, we should have memories of our births, which we don’t (Hume, 592). “The soul therefore if immortal, existed before our birth; and if the former existence no ways concerned us, neither will the latter.” (Hume, 592). Here, Hume is seen drawing on his considerations against miracles; constantly rejecting the possibility of a system whereby God continuously brings souls into existence. Finally, if the