Does it contain any experimental reasoning concerning matter of fact and existence? As the universe shews wisdom and goodness, we infer wisdom and goodness. He was a frank and brutally to-the-point writer, certainly unconventional, not afraid to present alternative modes of thinking and looking at things, and he has to be commended on his empirical method which is useful in the Science disciplines. Were our ignorance, therefore, a good reason for rejecting any thing, we should be led into denying all energy in the Supreme Being as much as in the grossest matter. قبلاً سعی کردم کتاب اخلاق هیوم رو به انگلیسی بخونم. But if we still carry on our sifting humor, and ask, What is the foundation of all conclusions from experience? What Hume dealt with is narrowly confined to issues of language, but the expression of language cannot be rid of its subjectivity and sophistry on the part of human beings with the way they express and understand it, in contrast to what reality and the actual world really is. This is a real creation; a production of something out of nothing: which implies a power so great, that it may seem, at first sight, beyond the reach of any being, less than infinite. Macat's Analyses are definitive studies of the most important books and papers in 14 humanities and social sciences subjects.
Through exploration of the humanities, we learn how to think critically and creatively, to reason, and to ask the right questions. May I not clearly and distinctly conceive that a body, falling from the clouds, and which, in all other respects, resembles snow, has yet the taste of salt or feeling of fire? I acknowledge, that, in the present order of things, virtue is attended with more peace of mind than vice, and meets with a more favourable reception from the world. Hume, in this book failed to make a distinction between the perceiver and the perceived. Philosophy is dense, and not for the faint of heart. But it is a miracle, that a dead man should come to life; because that has never been observed in any age or country. I was not surprised by his relentless scepticism, or by his insistence on basing all reasoning on empirical evidence.
It's about sixty pages, and is a rewriting of the first part of his more monolithic Treatise of Human Nature 1737 , which he started writing at about my age 23! Nor is geometry, when taken into the assistance of natural philosophy, ever able to remedy this defect, or lead us into the knowledge of ultimate causes, by all that accuracy of reasoning for which it is so justly celebrated. There are many other particulars of the same kind, which may diminish or destroy the force of any argument, derived from human testimony. He writes about how there is no proof of miracles defying the laws of nature, or of a Deity interfering in human affairs. To apply these principles to a particular instance; we may observe, that there is no species of reasoning more common, more useful, and even necessary to human life, than that which is derived from the testimony of men, and the reports of eye-witnesses and spectators. Now it seems evident that, if this conclusion were formed by reason, it would be as perfect at first, and upon one instance, as after ever so long a course of experience.
The problem of induction is forcefully and eloquently articulated here, and Hume's mostly convincing on everything he writes about. Thus the observation of human blindness and weakness is the result of all philosophy, and meets us at every turn, in spite of our endeavours to elude or avoid it. As I go through my career, references to Hume come up in my thoughts. It was a revision of an earlier effort, A Treatise of Human Nature, published anonymously in London in 1739—40. . Hume's compatibilist theory of free will proved extremely influential on subsequent moral philosophy.
German addresses are blocked - www. My book notes: Section 1: On the different species of philosophy In this section Hume distinguishes philosophy for the sake of philosophy from applied philosophy. This is the sum of all our experimental conclusions. In this book, he did not go at great lengths in discussing it, although his ideas are particularly insightful in the philosophical sense: It is universally allowed by modern enquirers, that all the sensible qualities of objects, such as hard, soft, hot, cold, white, black, etc are merely secondary, and exist not in the objects themselves, but are perceptions of the mind, without any external archetype or model, which they represent. Nothing can save us from this conclusion, but the asserting, that the ideas of those primary qualities are attained by Abstraction, an opinion, which, if we examine it accurately, we shall find to be unintelligible, and even absurd. The most ignorant and barbarous of these barbarians carry the report abroad.
What is given to us in our senses is everything we have ever been or can be. Those who would assert that this position is not universally true nor without exception, have only one. Hume, subsequently, became the darling of atheists and his arguments are often recycled by them ad nauseam still. Actions are, by their very nature, temporary and perishing; and where they proceed not from some causes in the character and disposition of the person who performed them, they can neither redound to his honour, if good; nor infamy, if evil. For my part, I shall think it sufficient, if the present hints excite the curiosity of the philosophers, and make them sensible how defective all common theories are in treating of such curious and such sublime subjects. He also argued that Locke's conception of material substance was unintelligible, a view which he also later advanced in the. Immediately another event, unknown to ourselves, and totally different from the one intended, is produced: This event produces another, equally unknown: till at last, through a long succession, the desired event is produced.
Hume makes much of probability. قبلاً سعی کردم کتاب اخلاق هیوم رو به انگلیسی بخونم. We should in vain therefore, attempt to demonstrate its falsehood. Rather than try to justify our beliefs or identify the truth, Hume seeks simply to explain why we believe what we believe. Without the influence of custom, we should be entirely ignorant of every matter of fact beyond what is immediately present to the memory and senses. Particularly striking successes have been notched up in machine translation, speech recognition, computer vision, and allied fields.
Be a philosopher; but amidst all your philosophy, be still a man. With that disclaimer, Hume sets out to contradict himself by writing lucidly about, while candidly acknowledging the severe lim 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. From their own conceit and imagination surely. The most lively thought is still inferior to the dullest sensation. But as the question is yet new, every reader may not trust so far to his own penetration, as to conclude, because an argument escapes his enquiry, that therefore it does not really exist. But I keep my mind still open to instruction, if any one will vouchsafe to bestow it on me. Such events, as bear little analogy to the common course of nature, are also readily confessed to be known only by experience, nor does any man imagine that the explosion of gunpowder, or the attraction of a lodestone, could ever be discovered by arguments a priori.
هیوم میگوید برای عموم مینویسد و به راستی چنین میکند. ولكن لتكون على الأقل الأساس العملى لهذه المعرفة وكذلك نجده يفند قصور الشك المطلق ما هو اليقين البشرى ؟؟ إنه السراب. The example was to illustrate ignorance of physical laws that can seem miraculous when one has not experienced them. These impressions are all strong and sensible. باید دست کم دو بار کتاب را به دقت خواند و بعد، از دفعه سوم به فهم استدلال های هیوم پرداخت. This negative argument must certainly, in process of time, become altogether convincing. و بعد از سه صفحه منصرف شدم.
As I read psychology books, physics books, and such, references to Hume come up in my thoughts. به غیر از بخش اول کتاب، که فکر کنم خودِ هیوم هم خیلی دوستاش نداشته باشه، بقیهی بخشها عالی هستند. Though there never were a circle or triangle in nature, the truths demonstrated by would for ever retain their certainty and evidence. There is required a medium, which may enable the mind to draw such an inference, if indeed it be drawn by reasoning and argument. All our reasonings concerning fact are of the same nature. If this be admitted as seems reasonable it follows that all the ideas of quantity, upon which mathematicians reason, are nothing but particular, and such as are suggested by the senses and imagination, and consequently, cannot be infinitely divisible.