Jump to content

David Hume: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
GreenC bot (talk | contribs)
Reformat 1 archive link. Wayback Medic 2.5 per WP:USURPURL and JUDI batch #20
 
(490 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Scottish philosopher, historian, economist and essayist (1711–1776)}}
{{other people}}
{{Other people}}
{{short description|Scottish philosopher, economist, and historian}}
{{Use Scottish English|date=December 2014}}
{{Use British English|date=December 2014}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=September 2015}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=March 2024}}
{{Infobox philosopher
{{Infobox philosopher
| image = Allan Ramsay - David Hume, 1711 - 1776. Historian and philosopher - PG 3521 - National Galleries of Scotland.jpg
| image = Painting of David Hume.jpg
| caption = Portrait by [[Allan Ramsay (artist)|Allan Ramsay]]
| caption = Portrait by [[Allan Ramsay (artist)|Allan Ramsay]], 1754
| birth_name = David Home
| birth_name = David Home
| birth_date = {{nowrap|7 May [[New Style|NS]] {{smaller|[26 April [[Old Style|OS]]]}} 1711}}
| birth_date = {{nowrap|7 May [[New Style|NS]] [26 April [[Old Style|OS]]] 1711}}
| birth_place = [[Edinburgh]], [[Scotland]], [[Kingdom of Great Britain|Great Britain]]
| birth_place = [[Royal Mile|Lawnmarket]], Edinburgh, Scotland
| death_date = {{death date and age|df=yes|1776|8|25|1711|4|26}}
| death_date = {{death date and age|df=yes|1776|8|25|1711|4|26}}
| death_place = Edinburgh, Scotland, Great Britain
| death_place = [[New Town, Edinburgh]], Scotland
| education = [[University of Edinburgh]]
| nationality = Scottish
| alma_mater = [[University of Edinburgh]]
| era = [[18th-century philosophy]]
| era = [[18th-century philosophy]]
| region = [[Western philosophy]]
| school_tradition = {{Startflatlist}}
| region = [[Western philosophy]]
| school_tradition = {{startflatlist}}
* [[Scottish Enlightenment]]
* [[Scottish Enlightenment]]
* [[Humeanism]]
* [[Metaphysical naturalism|Naturalism]]<ref name=SEP/>
* [[Metaphysical naturalism|Naturalism]]<ref name=SEP/>
* [[Philosophical skepticism|Scepticism]]
* [[Philosophical skepticism|Scepticism]]
* [[Empiricism]]
* [[Empiricism]]
* [[Irreligion]]
* [[Foundationalism]]<ref name=SEP-FTJ>{{cite encyclopedia | url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/justep-foundational/#4 | title=Foundationalist Theories of Epistemic Justification | encyclopedia=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy | date=21 February 2000 | accessdate=19 August 2018 | author=Fumerton, Richard}}</ref>
* [[Foundationalism]]<ref name=SEP-FTJ>{{cite encyclopedia | url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/justep-foundational/#4 | title=Foundationalist Theories of Epistemic Justification | encyclopedia=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy | date=21 February 2000 | access-date=19 August 2018 | author=Fumerton, Richard}}</ref>
* [[Newtonianism]]<ref>{{Cite book|title=David Hume and the culture of Scottish Newtonianism : methodology and ideology in Enlightenment inquiry|last=1975-|first=Demeter, Tamás|publisher=Brill|isbn=9789004327313|oclc=960722703|year = 2016}}</ref>
* [[Newtonianism]]<ref>{{Cite book|title=David Hume and the culture of Scottish Newtonianism : methodology and ideology in Enlightenment inquiry|last=Demeter|first=Tamás|publisher=Brill|isbn=978-90-04-32731-3|oclc=960722703|year = 2016}}</ref>
* [[Conceptualism]]<ref>[[David Bostock (philosopher)|David Bostock]], ''Philosophy of Mathematics: An Introduction'', Wiley-Blackwell, 2009, p. 43: "All of Descartes, Locke, Berkeley, and Hume supposed that mathematics is a theory of our ''ideas'', but none of them offered any argument for this conceptualist claim, and apparently took it to be uncontroversial."</ref>
* [[Conceptualism]]<ref>[[David Bostock (philosopher)|David Bostock]], ''Philosophy of Mathematics: An Introduction'', Wiley-Blackwell, 2009, p. 43: "All of Descartes, Locke, Berkeley, and Hume supposed that mathematics is a theory of our ''ideas'', but none of them offered any argument for this conceptualist claim, and apparently took it to be uncontroversial."</ref>
* [[Indirect realism]]<ref>[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/perception-episprob/ The Problem of Perception (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)]: "Paraphrasing David Hume (1739...; see also Locke 1690, Berkeley 1710, Russell 1912): nothing is ever directly present to the mind in perception except perceptual appearances."</ref>
* [[Indirect realism]]<ref>[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/perception-episprob/ The Problem of Perception (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)]: "Paraphrasing David Hume (1739...; see also Locke 1690, Berkeley 1710, Russell 1912): nothing is ever directly present to the mind in perception except perceptual appearances."</ref>
* [[Correspondence theory of truth]]<ref>{{cite book|url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2016/entriesruth-correspondence/|title=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy|first=Marian|last=David|editor-first=Edward N.|editor-last=Zalta|date=3 October 2018|publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University|via=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy}}{{Dead link|date=July 2019 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref>
* [[Correspondence theory of truth]]<ref>{{cite book|url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/truth-correspondence/|title=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy|first=Marian|last=David|chapter=The Correspondence Theory of Truth|editor-first=Edward N.|editor-last=Zalta|date=3 October 2018|publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University|via=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy}}</ref>
* [[Moral sentimentalism]]
* [[Moral sentimentalism]]
{{Endflatlist}}
* [[Classical liberalism|Liberalism]]
| main_interests = {{Startplainlist}}
{{endflatlist}}
* [[Aesthetics]]
| main_interests = {{startplainlist}}
* [[Economics]]
* {{hlist |[[Epistemology]] |[[Metaphysics]]}}
* [[Epistemology]]
* {{hlist |[[Ethics]] |[[Aesthetics]]}}
* [[Ethics]]
* [[Metaphysics]]
* [[Philosophy of mind]]
* [[Philosophy of mind]]
* [[Political philosophy]]
* [[Philosophy of religion]]
* [[Philosophy of religion]]
* [[Classical economics]]
* [[Political philosophy]]
{{endplainlist}}
{{Endplainlist}}
| notable_ideas = {{startplainlist}}
| notable_ideas = {{collapsible list|
* [[Causality#After the Middle Ages|Problem of causation]]
* [[Humean definition of causality|Problem of causation]]
* [[Problem of induction]]
* [[Problem of induction]]
* [[Constant conjunction]]
* [[Constant conjunction]]
Line 50: Line 52:
* [[Science of man]]
* [[Science of man]]
* [[Moral sense theory|Moral sentiments]]
* [[Moral sense theory|Moral sentiments]]
{{endplainlist}}
| influences = {{startflatlist}}
<!--(Alphabetical by surname:)-->
* [[Pierre Bayle|Bayle]]
* [[George Berkeley|Berkeley]]
* [[Cicero]]
* [[Thomas Hobbes|Hobbes]]
* [[Francis Hutcheson (philosopher)|Hutcheson]]
* [[John Locke|Locke]]
* [[Nicolas Malebranche|Malebranche]]{{sfn|Fisher|2011|p=527–528}}
* [[Isaac Newton|Newton]]
* [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau|Rousseau]]
* [[Adam Smith|Smith]]
{{endflatlist}}
| influenced = {{startflatlist}}
<!--(Alphabetical by surname:)-->
Virtually all subsequent [[Western philosophy]], especially [[Alfred Jules Ayer|Ayer]], [[Simon Blackburn|Blackburn]], [[Jorge Luis Borges|Borges]],{{sfn|Martin Orejana|1991|p=?}} [[Gilles Deleuze|Deleuze]], [[Daniel Dennett|Dennett]], [[Albert Einstein|Einstein]], [[Jerry Fodor|Fodor]], [[Johann Georg Hamann|Hamann]], [[Alexander Hamilton|Hamilton]], [[Edmund Husserl|Husserl]], [[Thomas Jefferson|Jefferson]], [[William James|James]], [[Immanuel Kant|Kant]], [[J. L. Mackie|Mackie]], [[James Madison|Madison]], [[John Stuart Mill|Mill]], [[Karl Popper|Popper]], [[Thomas Reid|Reid]], [[Bertrand Russell|Russell]], [[Arthur Schopenhauer|Schopenhauer]], [[Adam Smith|Smith]]
{{endflatlist}}
}}
}}
}}

'''David Hume''' ({{IPAc-en|h|juː|m}}; born '''David Home'''; {{nowrap|7 May 1711}} – 25 August 1776) was a Scottish philosopher, historian, economist, and essayist who was best known for his highly influential system of [[empiricism]], [[philosophical skepticism|philosophical scepticism]] and [[metaphysical naturalism]].<ref name=SEP/> Beginning with ''[[A Treatise of Human Nature]]'' (1739–40), Hume strove to create a naturalistic science of man that examined the psychological basis of human nature. Hume followed [[John Locke]] in rejecting the existence of [[innatism|innate ideas]], concluding that all human knowledge derives solely from experience. This places him with [[Francis Bacon]], [[Thomas Hobbes]], John Locke, and [[George Berkeley]] as an empiricist.{{sfn|Atherton|1999|p=?}}<ref name=":1">[[Maurice Cranston|Cranston, Maurice]], and [[T. E. Jessop|Thomas Edmund Jessop]]. 2020 [1999] "[https://www.britannica.com/biography/David-Hume#toc12268 David Hume]." ''[[Encyclopædia Britannica]]''. Retrieved 18 May 2020.</ref><ref>Harris, M. H. 1966. "David Hume". ''Library Quarterly'' 36 (April): 88–98.</ref>

Hume argued that [[inductive reasoning]] and belief in [[causality]] cannot be justified rationally; instead, they result from custom and mental habit. We never actually perceive that one event causes another but only experience the "[[constant conjunction]]" of events. This [[problem of induction]] means that to draw any causal inferences from past experience, it is necessary to presuppose that the future will resemble the past; this metaphysical presupposition cannot itself be grounded in prior experience.<ref>{{cite book|last=Berlin|first=Isaiah|authorlink=Isaiah Berlin | url=http://press.princeton.edu/titles/9980.html|title=The Roots of Romanticism|date=2013|publisher=Princeton University Press|edition=2nd|location=Princeton|isbn=978-0691156200}}</ref>

An opponent of philosophical [[Rationalism|rationalists]], Hume held that passions rather than reason govern human behaviour, famously proclaiming that "[[Fact–value distinction|Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions]]."{{sfn|Atherton|1999|p=?}}{{sfn|Hume|1739|p=415}} Hume was also a [[Moral sense theory|sentimentalist]] who held that ethics are based on emotion or sentiment rather than abstract moral principle. He maintained an early commitment to naturalistic explanations of moral phenomena and is usually accepted by historians of European philosophy to have first clearly expounded the [[is–ought problem]], or the idea that a statement of fact alone can never give rise to a [[norm (philosophy)|normative]] conclusion of what ''ought'' to be done.<ref name=":6"/>

Hume denied that humans have an actual conception of the self, positing that we experience only a [[bundle theory|bundle of sensations]], and that the self is nothing more than this bundle of perceptions connected by an association of ideas. Hume's [[Compatibilism|compatibilist]] theory of [[free will]] takes [[determinism|causal determinism]] as fully compatible with human freedom.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia|url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hume-freewill/|title=Hume on Free Will|encyclopedia=stanford.edu|publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University|year=2016}}</ref> His [[philosophy of religion]], including his rejection of miracles, and of the [[teleological argument|argument from design]] for God's existence, were especially controversial for their time. Hume left a legacy that affected [[utilitarianism]], [[logical positivism]], the [[philosophy of science]], early [[analytic philosophy]], [[cognitive science]], [[theology]], and many other fields and thinkers. [[Immanuel Kant]] credited Hume as the inspiration that had awakened him from his "dogmatic slumbers."


== Early life ==
'''David Hume''' ({{IPAc-en|h|juː|m}}; born '''David Home'''; 7 May 1711 [[New Style|NS]] <small>(26 April 1711 [[Old Style|OS]])</small> – 25 August 1776)<ref name="Encyclopedia Britannica" /> was a [[Scottish Enlightenment]] [[philosopher]], [[historian]], [[economist]], and [[essayist]], who is best known today for his highly influential system of philosophical [[empiricism]], [[philosophical skepticism|scepticism]], and [[Metaphysical naturalism|naturalism]].<ref name=SEP/> Beginning with ''[[A Treatise of Human Nature]]'' (1739–40), Hume strove to create a naturalistic [[science of man]] that examined the psychological basis of human nature. Hume argued against the existence of [[innatism|innate ideas]], positing that all human knowledge derives solely from [[experience]]. This places him with [[Francis Bacon]], [[Thomas Hobbes]], [[John Locke]], and [[George Berkeley]], as a [[British Empiricism|British Empiricist]].{{sfn|Atherton|1999|p= ?}}
Hume was born on 26 April 1711, as David Home, in a [[tenement]] on the north side of [[Edinburgh]]'s [[Royal Mile|Lawnmarket]]. He was the second of two sons born to Catherine Home ([[Birth name|née]] [[Clan Keith|Falconer]]), daughter of Sir [[David Falconer]] of Newton, Midlothian and his wife Mary Falconer (née Norvell),<ref name=":2">Hume, David. 1778 [1776]. "[https://web.archive.org/web/20150813092134/http://davidhume.org/texts/mol.html My Own Life]." In ''The History of England, from the Invasion of Julius Cæsar to the Revolution in 1688'' 1. London. Archived from the [http://davidhume.org/texts/mol.html original] on 13 August 2015. Also available [https://web.archive.org/web/20180116061536/http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Texts/humelife.html via Rutgers University]. Retrieved 18 May 2020.</ref> and Joseph [[Clan Home|Home]] of [[Chirnside]] in the [[Berwickshire|County of Berwick]], an advocate of [[Chirnside#Ninewells House|Ninewells]]. Joseph died just after David's second birthday. Catherine, who never remarried, raised the two brothers and their sister on her own.<ref>Morris, Ted. 2018 [2013]. "[https://web.archive.org/web/20180401123150/http://www.humesociety.org/about/HumeBiography.asp David Hume Biography]." ''The Hume Society''. Retrieved 18 May 2020.</ref>


Hume changed his family name's spelling in 1734, as the surname 'Home' (pronounced as 'Hume') was not well-known in England. Hume never married and lived partly at his Chirnside family home in Berwickshire, which had belonged to the family since the 16th century. His finances as a young man were very "slender", as his family was not rich; as a younger son he had little [[wikt:patrimony|patrimony]] to live on.{{sfn|Hume|1778|p=3}}
Hume argued that [[inductive reasoning]] and belief in [[causality]] cannot be justified rationally; instead, they result from custom and mental habit. We never actually perceive that one event causes another, but only experience the "[[constant conjunction]]" of events. This [[problem of induction]] means that to draw any causal inferences from past experience it is necessary to presuppose that the future will resemble the past, a presupposition which cannot itself be grounded in prior experience.<ref>{{cite book|url=http://press.princeton.edu/titles/9980.html|last=Berlin|first=Isaiah|title=The Roots of Romanticism|location=Princeton|publisher=Princeton U.P.|edition=2|date=2013}}</ref>


Hume attended the [[University of Edinburgh]] at an unusually early age{{mdash}}either 12 or possibly as young as 10{{mdash}}at a time when 14 was the typical age. Initially, Hume considered a career in [[Scots law|law]], because of his family. However, in his words, he came to have:{{sfn|Hume|1778|p=3}}
An opponent of philosophical [[rationalism|rationalists]], Hume held that passions rather than reason govern human behaviour, famously proclaiming that [[Fact–value distinction|"Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions"]].{{sfn|Atherton|1999|p= ?}} Hume was also a [[Moral sense theory|sentimentalist]] who held that ethics are based on emotion or sentiment rather than abstract moral principle. He maintained an early commitment to naturalistic explanations of moral phenomena, and is usually taken to have first clearly expounded the [[is–ought problem]], or the idea that a statement of fact alone can never give rise to a [[norm (philosophy)|normative]] conclusion of what ''ought'' to be done.<ref name="books.google.com.au"/>


<blockquote>...an insurmountable aversion to everything but the pursuits of Philosophy and general Learning; and while [my family] fanceyed I was poring over [[Johannes Voet|Voet]] and [[Arnold Vinnius|Vinnius]], [[Cicero]] and [[Virgil]] were the Authors which I was secretly devouring.</blockquote>
Hume also denied that humans have an actual conception of the self, positing that we experience only a [[bundle theory|bundle of sensations]], and that the self is nothing more than this bundle of causally-connected perceptions. Hume's [[Compatibilism|compatibilist]] theory of [[free will]] takes [[determinism|causal determinism]] as fully compatible with human freedom.<ref>{{cite book|url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hume-freewill/|title=Hume on Free Will|encyclopedia=stanford.edu|publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University|year=2016}}</ref> His views on [[philosophy of religion]], including his rejection of miracles and the [[teleological argument|argument from design]] for God's existence, were especially controversial for their time.


He had little respect for the professors of his time, telling a friend in 1735 that "there is nothing to be learnt from a Professor, which is not to be met with in Books".{{sfn|Mossner|1958|pp=30–33|ps=, quoted in {{harvtxt|Wright|2009|p=10}}}} He did not graduate.{{sfn|Harris|2004|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=K2ygCgAAQBAJ&dq=Hume+did+not+graduate&pg=PA35 p. 35]}}
Hume influenced [[utilitarianism]], [[logical positivism]], the [[philosophy of science]], early [[analytic philosophy]], [[cognitive science]], [[theology]], and many other fields and thinkers. [[Immanuel Kant]] credited Hume as the inspiration who had awakened him from his "dogmatic slumbers".


=== "Disease of the learned" ===
==Biography==
At around age 18, Hume made a philosophical discovery that opened up to him "a new Scene of Thought", inspiring him "to throw up every other Pleasure or Business to apply entirely to it".{{sfn|Hume|1993|p=346}} As he did not recount what this scene exactly was, commentators have offered a variety of speculations.{{Sfn|Johnson|1995|pp=8–9}} One prominent interpretation among contemporary Humean scholarship is that this new "scene of thought" was Hume's realisation that [[Francis Hutcheson (philosopher)|Francis Hutcheson]]'s theory of ''moral sense'' could be applied to the understanding of morality as well.


From this inspiration, Hume set out to spend a minimum of 10 years reading and writing. He soon came to the verge of a mental breakdown, first starting with a coldness{{mdash}}which he attributed to a "Laziness of Temper"{{mdash}}that lasted about nine months. [[Scurvy]] spots later broke out on his fingers, persuading Hume's physician to diagnose him with the "Disease of the Learned".{{Cn|date=July 2024}}
===Early life and education===
Born on 26 April 1711 ([[Old Style and New Style dates|Old Style]]) in a tenement on the north side of the [[Lawnmarket]] in [[Edinburgh]], Hume was the second of two sons of Joseph Home of [[Chirnside#Ninewells House|Ninewells]], an advocate. Hume's mother, Katherine (''née'' Falconer), was the daughter of Sir David Falconer.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Texts/humelife.html|title=David Hume, "My Own Life"|author=|date=|website=andromeda.rutgers.edu|accessdate=25 February 2015|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20180116061536/http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Texts/humelife.html|archivedate=16 January 2018}}</ref> Hume's father died just after his second birthday, and he was raised by his mother, who never remarried.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.humesociety.org/about/HumeBiography.asp|title=David Hume Biography|work=humesociety.org|access-date=13 August 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180401123150/http://www.humesociety.org/about/HumeBiography.asp|archive-date=1 April 2018|url-status=dead}}</ref> He changed the spelling of his name in 1734, because of the fact that his surname "Home", pronounced "Hume", was not known in England. Hume never married and lived partly at his family home at [[Chirnside]] in [[Berwickshire]], which had belonged to the family since the sixteenth century. His finances as a young man were very "slender". His family was not rich, and, as a younger son, he had little [[wikt:patrimony|patrimony]] to live on so needed to make a living.{{sfn|Hume|1778|p=3}}


Hume wrote that he "went under a Course of Bitters and Anti-Hysteric Pills", taken along with a pint of [[Bordeaux wine|claret]] every day. He also decided to have a more active life to better continue his learning.{{sfn|Mossner|1950|p=193}} His health improved somewhat, but in 1731, he was afflicted with a ravenous appetite and [[palpitations]]. After eating well for a time, he went from being "tall, lean and raw-bon'd" to being "sturdy, robust [and] healthful-like."<ref>Hume, David. 1932 [1734] "Letter to a [Dr George Cheyne]". pp. 13–15 in ''The Letters of David Hume'' 1, edited by [[J. Y. T. Greig]]. Oxford: [[Oxford University Press]]. {{ISBN|978-0-19-186158-1}}. {{doi|10.1093/actrade/9780199693245.book.1}}.</ref>{{sfn|Mossner|1980|p=[https://archive.org/details/lifeofdavidhume0000moss/page/204 204]}}<ref>Wright, John P. 2003. "Dr. George Cheyne, Chevalier Ramsay, and Hume's Letter to a Physician." ''[[Hume Studies]]'' 29(1):125–141. – via [[Project MUSE]]. {{doi|10.1353/hms.2011.0100}}.</ref> Indeed, Hume would become well known for being obese and having a fondness for good port and cheese, often using them as philosophical metaphors for his conjectures.{{sfn|Mossner|1980|p=[[iarchive:lifeofdavidhume0000moss/page/204|204]]}}
Hume attended the [[University of Edinburgh]] at the unusually early age of 12 (possibly as young as 10) at a time when 14 was typical. At first, because of his family, he considered a career in [[Scots law|law]], but came to have, in his words, "an insurmountable aversion to everything but the pursuits of Philosophy and general Learning; and while [my family] fanceyed I was poring over [[Johannes Voet|Voet]] and [[Arnold Vinnius|Vinnius]], [[Cicero]] and [[Virgil]] were the Authors which I was secretly devouring".{{sfn|Hume|1778|p=3}} He had little respect for the professors of his time, telling a friend in 1735 that "there is nothing to be learnt from a Professor, which is not to be met with in Books".{{sfn|Mossner|1958|pp=30–33|ps=, quoted in {{harvtxt|Wright|2009|p=10}}}} Hume did not graduate.{{sfn|Harris|2004|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=K2ygCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA35&lpg=PA35&dq=Hume+did+not+graduate&source=bl&ots=sc4E8eb4Ij&sig=4SSQXHoO4QmiGKJuz-dyzgGSxxU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjxp769u4vKAhUIhhoKHSs9BqcQ6AEIHzAA#v=onepage&q=Hume%20did%20not%20graduate&f=false p. 35]}}


== Career ==
Aged around 18, he made a philosophical discovery that opened up to him "a new Scene of Thought", which inspired him "to throw up every other Pleasure or Business to apply entirely to it".{{sfn|Hume|1993|p=346}} He did not recount what this scene was, and commentators have offered a variety of speculations.{{Sfn|Johnson|1995|pp=8–9}} One popular interpretation, prominent in contemporary Hume scholarship, is that the new "scene of thought" was Hume's realization that [[Francis Hutcheson (philosopher)|Francis Hutcheson's]] "moral sense" theory of morality could be applied to the understanding as well. Due to this inspiration, Hume set out to spend a minimum of 10 years reading and writing. He soon came to the verge of a [[mental breakdown]], suffering from what a doctor diagnosed as the "Disease of the Learned". Hume wrote that it started with a coldness, which he attributed to a "Laziness of Temper", that lasted about nine months. Later, some [[scurvy]] spots broke out on his fingers. This was what persuaded Hume's physician to make his diagnosis. Hume wrote that he "went under a Course of Bitters and Anti-Hysteric Pills", taken along with a pint of claret every day. Hume also decided to have a more active life to better continue his learning.{{sfn|Mossner|1950|p=193}} His health improved somewhat, but in 1731 he was afflicted with a ravenous appetite and palpitations of the heart. After eating well for a time, he went from being "tall, lean and raw-bon'd" to being "sturdy, robust [and] healthful-like".{{sfn|Hume|2011|pp=13–15}} Indeed, Hume would become well known for being obese and a fondness for good port and cheese.<ref>{{Cite book|title=The life of David Hume|last=Mossner|first=Ernest Campbell|publisher=Clarendon Press|year=2001|isbn=0198243812|edition=2nd|location=Oxford|pages=[https://archive.org/details/lifeofdavidhume0000moss/page/204 204]|oclc=4642088|url-access=registration|url=https://archive.org/details/lifeofdavidhume0000moss/page/204}}</ref>
Despite having noble ancestry, Hume had no source of income and no learned profession by age 25. As was common at his time, he became a [[merchant]]'s assistant, despite having to leave his native Scotland. He travelled via [[Bristol]] to [[La Flèche]] in [[Duchy of Anjou|Anjou]], France. There he had frequent discourse with the [[Jesuits]] of the [[College of La Flèche]].<ref>{{cite book|last=Huxley|first= Thomas Henry|date= 2011 |orig-date=1879|title=Hume|series=[[English Men of Letters]]|volume= 39|location= Cambridge|publisher= [[Cambridge University Press]]|isbn=978-1-108-03477-7|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=eH67vOxyjEYC&pg=PA7 |pages = 7–8}}</ref>


Hume was derailed in his attempts to start a university career by protests over his alleged "[[atheism]]",<ref>Hume, David. 2007 [1748]. ''[[An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding]]'', edited by [[Peter Millican|P. Millican]]. Oxford: [[Oxford University Press]]. {{ISBN|978-0-19-152635-0}}. {{OCLC|314220887}}. pp. lxiii–lxiv.</ref><ref name=":5" /> also lamenting that his literary debut, ''[[A Treatise of Human Nature]]'', "fell dead-born from the press."<ref name=":2" /> However, he found literary success in his lifetime as an essayist, and a career as a librarian at the [[University of Edinburgh]]. These successes provided him much needed income at the time. His tenure there, and the access to research materials it provided, resulted in Hume's writing the massive six-volume ''[[The History of England (Hume book)|The History of England]]'', which became a bestseller and the standard history of England in its day. For over 60 years, Hume was the dominant interpreter of English history.<ref name=":7">{{Cite book|last=Trevor-Roper|first=Hugh|title=History and the Enlightenment|publisher=[[Yale University Press]]|year=2010}}</ref>{{Rp|120}} He described his "love for literary fame" as his "ruling passion"<ref name=":2" /> and judged his two late works, the so-called "first" and "second" enquiries, ''[[An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding]]'' and ''[[An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals]]'', as his greatest literary and philosophical achievements.<ref name=":2" /> He would ask of his contemporaries to judge him on the merits of the later texts alone, rather than on the more radical formulations of his early, youthful work, dismissing his philosophical debut as [[juvenilia]]: "A work which the Author had projected before he left College."<ref>Hume, David. 1777. [https://web.archive.org/web/20150813074441/http://davidhume.org/texts/etv2.html ''Essays and Treatises on Several Subjects'' 2]. London. Archived from the [http://davidhume.org/texts/etv2.html original] on 13 August 2015. Retrieved 18 May 2020.</ref> Despite Hume's protestations, a consensus exists today that his most important arguments and philosophically distinctive doctrines are found in the original form they take in the ''Treatise''. Though he was only 23 years old when starting this work, it is now regarded as one of the most important in the history of [[Western philosophy]].<ref name=":6" />
===Career===
At 25 years of age, Hume, although of noble ancestry, had no source of income and no learned profession. As was common at his time, he became a merchant's assistant, but he had to leave his native Scotland. He travelled via [[Bristol]] to [[La Flèche]] in Anjou, France. There he had frequent discourse with the [[Jesuits]] of the [[College of La Flèche]].{{sfn|Huxley|2011|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=eH67vOxyjEYC&pg=PA7&dq=hume+travelling+tutorship&hl=en&sa=X&ei=eBOIVMH_K4nvUvflg-gG&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=hume%20travelling%20tutorship&f=false pp. 7–8]}}


=== 1730s ===
Hume was derailed in his attempts to start a university career by protests over his alleged "[[atheism]]"<ref>{{Cite book|title=An enquiry concerning human understanding|last=Hume|first=David|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=2007|isbn=978-0191526350|editor-last=Millican|editor-first=Peter|location=Oxford|pages=lxiii–lxiv|oclc=314220887}}</ref> and lamented that his literary debut, ''[[A Treatise of Human Nature]]'', "fell dead-born from the press".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://davidhume.org/texts/mol.html|title=Texts - My Own Life (1777)|work=davidhume.org|access-date=12 August 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150813092134/http://davidhume.org/texts/mol.html|archive-date=13 August 2015|url-status=dead}}</ref> However, he found literary success in his lifetime as an essayist, and a career as a librarian at the [[University of Edinburgh]]. His tenure there, and the access to research materials it provided, ultimately resulted in Hume's writing the massive six-volume ''[[The History of England (Hume)|The History of England]]'', which became a bestseller and the standard history of England in its day. For over sixty years, Hume was the dominant interpreter of English history.<ref>{{Cite book|title=History and the Enlightenment|last=Trevor-Roper|first=Hugh|publisher=Yale University Press|year=2010|isbn=|location=|pages=120}}</ref> Hume described his "love for literary fame" as his "ruling passion"<ref name="davidhume.org">{{cite web|url=http://www.davidhume.org/texts/mol.html|title=Texts - My Own Life (1777)|work=davidhume.org|access-date=10 August 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150813092134/http://davidhume.org/texts/mol.html|archive-date=13 August 2015|url-status=dead}}</ref> and judged his two late works, the so-called "first" and "second" enquiries, ''[[An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding]]'' and ''[[An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals]]'', respectively, as his greatest literary and philosophical achievements,<ref name="davidhume.org" /> asking his contemporaries to judge him on the merits of the later texts alone, rather than the more radical formulations of his early, youthful work, dismissing his philosophical debut as [[juvenilia]]: "A work which the Author had projected before he left College."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.davidhume.org/texts/etv2.html|title=Texts - Essays and Treatises on Several Subjects, vol. 2 (1777)|work=davidhume.org|access-date=10 August 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150813074441/http://davidhume.org/texts/etv2.html|archive-date=13 August 2015|url-status=dead}}</ref> Despite Hume's protestations, a general consensus exists today that Hume's most important arguments and philosophically distinctive doctrines are found in the original form they take in the ''Treatise''. Hume was just 23 years old when he started this work and it is now regarded as one of the most important in the history of [[Western philosophy]].<ref name="books.google.com.au" />
Hume worked for four years on his first major work, ''A Treatise of Human Nature'', subtitled "Being an Attempt to Introduce the Experimental Method of Reasoning into Moral Subjects", completing it in 1738 at age 28. Although many scholars today consider the ''Treatise'' to be Hume's most important work and one of the most important books in Western philosophy, critics in Great Britain at the time described it as "abstract and unintelligible".{{sfn|Mossner|1950|p=195}} As Hume had spent most of his savings during those four years,{{sfn|Mossner|1950|p=193}} he resolved "to make a very rigid frugality supply [his] deficiency of fortune, to maintain unimpaired [his] independency, and to regard every object as contemptible except the improvements of [his] talents in literature".<ref name=":8">Hume, David. 1993 [1734]. "[[s:A kind of history of my life|A Kind of History of My Life]]." In ''The Cambridge Companion to Hume'', edited by D. F. Norton. Cambridge: [[Cambridge University Press]]. {{ISBN|978-0-521-38710-1}}.</ref>{{Rp|352}}


He worked for four years on his first major work, ''[[A Treatise of Human Nature]]'', subtitled "Being an Attempt to Introduce the Experimental Method of Reasoning into Moral Subjects", completing it in 1738 at the age of 28. Although many scholars today consider the ''Treatise'' to be Hume's most important work and one of the most important books in Western philosophy, the critics in [[Kingdom of Great Britain|Great Britain]] at the time did not agree, describing it as "abstract and unintelligible".{{sfn|Mossner|1950|p=195}} As Hume had spent most of his savings during those four years,{{sfn|Mossner|1950|p=193}} he resolved "to make a very rigid frugality supply my deficiency of fortune, to maintain unimpaired my independency, and to regard every object as contemptible except the improvements of my talents in literature".{{sfn|Hume|1993|p=352}} Despite the disappointment, Hume later wrote: "Being naturally of a cheerful and [[Humorism|sanguine]] temper, I soon recovered from the blow and prosecuted with great ardour my studies in the country."{{sfn|Hume|1993|p=352}} There, in an attempt to make his larger work better known and more intelligible, he published the ''[[A Treatise of Human Nature (Abstract)|An Abstract of a Book lately Published]]'' as a summary of the main doctrines of the ''Treatise'', without revealing its authorship.{{sfn|Hume|1740}} Although there has been some academic speculation as to who actually wrote this pamphlet,{{sfn|Norton|1993|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=vv5ERpFQBCoC&pg=PA31&dq=hume+abstract+author&hl=en&sa=X&ei=70ODVLXoM4r_UIDpgNgP&ved=0CEIQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=hume%20abstract%20author&f=false p. 31]}} it is generally regarded as Hume's creation.{{sfn|Redman|1997|loc= [https://books.google.com/books?id=1faeMedY8k8C&pg=PA175&dq=An+Abstract+of+a+Book+lately+Published;+Entitled&hl=en&sa=X&ei=XRryVP6yCYX6ygPViYDABg&ved=0CEYQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=An%20Abstract%20of%20a%20Book%20lately%20Published%3B%20Entitled&f=false p. 175, footnote 19]}}
Despite the disappointment, Hume later wrote: "Being naturally of a cheerful and [[Humorism|sanguine]] temper, I soon recovered from the blow and prosecuted with great ardour my studies in the country."<ref name=":8" />{{Rp|352}} There, in an attempt to make his larger work better known and more intelligible, he published the ''[[A Treatise of Human Nature (Abstract)|An Abstract of a Book lately Published]]'' as a summary of the main doctrines of the ''Treatise'', without revealing its authorship.{{sfn|Hume|1740}} This work contained the same ideas, but with a shorter and clearer explanation. Although there has been some academic speculation as to the pamphlet's true author,{{sfn|Norton|1993|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=vv5ERpFQBCoC&dq=hume+abstract+author&pg=PA31 p. 31]}} it is generally regarded as Hume's creation.{{sfn|Redman|1997|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=1faeMedY8k8C&dq=An+Abstract+of+a+Book+lately+Published%3B+Entitled&pg=PA175 p. 175, footnote 19]}}


=== 1740s ===
After the publication of ''Essays Moral and Political'' in 1741, which was included in the later edition called ''[[Essays, Moral, Political, and Literary]]'', Hume applied for the Chair of Pneumatics and Moral Philosophy at the University of Edinburgh. However, the position was given to [[William Cleghorn]]{{sfn|Nobbs|1965|p=575}} after Edinburgh ministers petitioned the town council not to appoint Hume because he was seen as an [[atheism|atheist]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.iep.utm.edu/hume-rel/ |title=Hume, David: Religion &#124; Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Iep.utm.edu |accessdate=16 March 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170517005711/http://www.iep.utm.edu/hume-rel/ |archive-date=17 May 2017 |url-status=dead }}</ref>
After the publication of ''Essays Moral and Political'' in 1741{{mdash}}included in the later edition as ''[[Essays, Moral, Political, and Literary]]''{{mdash}}Hume applied for the Chair of Pneumatics and Moral Philosophy at the University of Edinburgh. However, the position was given to [[William Cleghorn]]<ref>Nobbs, Douglas. 1965. "The Political Ideas of William Cleghorn, Hume's Academic Rival." ''[[Journal of the History of Ideas]]'' 26(4):575–586. {{doi|10.2307/2708501}}. {{JSTOR|2708501}}. p. 575.</ref> after Edinburgh ministers petitioned the town council not to appoint Hume because he was seen as an atheist.<ref>Lorkowski, C. M. "[https://web.archive.org/web/20170517005711/http://www.iep.utm.edu/hume-rel/ David Hume: Religion]." ''[[Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]''.</ref>
[[File:David Hume 1754.jpeg|thumb|left|An engraving of Hume from the first volume of his ''The History of England'', 1754]]
[[File:David Hume 1754.jpeg|thumb|left|An engraving of Hume from the first volume of his ''The History of England'', 1754]]
During the 1745 [[Jacobite risings|Jacobite rising]], Hume tutored the [[George Vanden-Bempde, 3rd Marquess of Annandale|Marquess of Annandale]] (1720–92), but this engagement ended in disarray after about a year.{{sfn|Mossner|1950|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=7HXJAqqNl4QC&pg=PA378&dq=annandale+lunatic+hume&hl=en&sa=X&ei=bxWIVPykIYHtUtevgvAI&ved=0CCgQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=annandale%20lunatic%20hume&f=false p. 172]}} Hume then started his great historical work ''[[The History of England (Hume)|The History of England]]'', taking fifteen years and running to over a million words. During this time he was also involved with the Canongate Theatre through his friend [[John Home]], a preacher.{{sfn|Fieser|2005|loc=[https://www.google.co.uk/search?tbm=bks&hl=en&q=canongate+theatre&gws_rd=ssl#hl=en&tbm=bks&q=canongate+theatre+hume+fieser p. xxii]}}
In 1745, during the [[Jacobite rising of 1745|Jacobite risings]], Hume tutored the [[George Vanden-Bempde, 3rd Marquess of Annandale|Marquess of Annandale]], an engagement that ended in disarray after about a year. The Marquess could not follow with Hume's lectures, his father saw little need for philosophy, and on a personal level, the Marquess found Hume's dietary tendencies to be bizarre.{{sfn|Mossner|1950|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=7HXJAqqNl4QC&dq=annandale+lunatic+hume&pg=PA378 p. 172]}} Hume then started his great historical work, ''The History of England'', which took fifteen years and ran to over a million words. During this time, he was also involved with the Canongate Theatre through his friend [[John Home]], a preacher.{{sfn|Fieser|2005|loc=[https://www.google.co.uk/search?tbm=bks&hl=en&q=canongate+theatre&gws_rd=ssl#hl=en&tbm=bks&q=canongate+theatre+hume+fieser p. xxii]}}


In this context, he associated with [[James Burnett, Lord Monboddo|Lord Monboddo]] and other [[Scottish Enlightenment]] luminaries in Edinburgh. From 1746, Hume served for three years as secretary to General [[James St Clair]], who was envoy to the courts of [[Turin]] and [[Vienna]]. At that time Hume also wrote ''Philosophical Essays Concerning Human Understanding'', later published as ''[[An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding]]''. Often called the ''First Enquiry'', it proved little more successful than the ''Treatise'', perhaps because of the publishing of his short autobiography, ''My Own Life'', which "made friends difficult for the first Enquiry".{{sfn|Buckle|1999|p= ?}}
In this context, he associated with [[James Burnett, Lord Monboddo|Lord Monboddo]] and other thinkers of the [[Scottish Enlightenment]] in Edinburgh. From 1746, Hume served for three years as secretary to General [[James St Clair]], who was envoy to the courts of [[Turin]] and [[Vienna]]. At that time Hume wrote ''Philosophical Essays Concerning Human Understanding'', later published as ''An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding''. Often called the ''First Enquiry'', it proved little more successful than the ''Treatise'', perhaps because of the publication of his short autobiography ''My Own Life'', which "made friends difficult for the first Enquiry".<ref name = buckle>Buckle, Stephen. 1999. "Hume's biography and Hume's philosophy." ''[[Australasian Journal of Philosophy]]'' 77:1–25. {{doi|10.1080/00048409912348781}}.</ref> By the end of this period Hume had attained his well-known corpulent stature; "the good table of the General and the prolonged inactive life had done their work", leaving him "a man of tremendous bulk".{{sfn|Mossner|1980|p=[[iarchive:lifeofdavidhume0000moss/page/204|204]]}}
In 1749 he went to live with his brother in the countryside.


In 1749 he went to live with his brother in the countryside, although he continued to associate with the aforementioned Scottish Enlightenment figures.
Hume's religious views were often suspect. It was necessary in the 1750s for his friends to avert a trial against him on the charge of [[heresy in Christianity|heresy]]. However, he "would not have come and could not be forced to attend if he said he was not a member of the Established Church".{{sfn|Emerson|2009|p=244}} Hume failed to gain the [[Professor of Moral Philosophy (Glasgow)|chair of philosophy]] at the [[University of Glasgow]] because of his religious views. He had published the ''Philosophical Essays'' by this time which were decidedly anti-religious. Even [[Adam Smith]], his personal friend who had vacated the Glasgow philosophy chair, was against his appointment out of concern public opinion would be against it.{{sfn|Rivers|2000|p=255}}


=== 1750s–1760s ===
Hume returned to Edinburgh in 1751. In the following year "the Faculty of Advocates chose me their Librarian, an office from which I received little or no emolument, but which gave me the command of a large library".{{sfn|Hume|1778|p=11}} This resource enabled him to continue historical research for ''The History of England''. Hume's volume of ''Political Discourses'', written in 1749 and published by Kincaid & [[Alexander Donaldson (bookseller)|Donaldson]] in 1752,{{sfn|Sher|2008|p=312}} was the only work he considered successful on first publication.{{sfn|Hume|1778|p=10}}
Hume's religious views were often suspect and, in the 1750s, it was necessary for his friends to avert a trial against him on the charge of [[heresy in Christianity|heresy]], specifically in an ecclesiastical court. However, he "would not have come and could not be forced to attend if he said he was not a member of the Established Church".{{sfn|Emerson|2009|p=244}} Hume failed to gain the [[Professor of Moral Philosophy (Glasgow)|chair of philosophy]] at the [[University of Glasgow]] due to his religious views. By this time, he had published the ''Philosophical Essays'', which were decidedly anti-religious. This represented a turning point in his career and the various opportunities made available to him. Even [[Adam Smith]], his personal friend who had vacated the Glasgow philosophy chair, was against his appointment out of concern that public opinion would be against it.<ref>Rivers, Isabel. 2000. ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=VSqj2pyBN3sC Reason, Grace, and Sentiment: A Study of the Language of Religion and Ethics in England, 1660–1780]'' '''2'''. Cambridge: [[Cambridge University Press]]. {{ISBN|978-0-511-48447-6}}. {{doi|10.1017/CBO9780511484476}}. p. 255.</ref> In 1761, all his works were banned on the '''''[[Index Librorum Prohibitorum]]'''''.<ref>{{Cite web|title=BFE – Censored publications – Search result|url=http://search.beaconforfreedom.org/search/censored_publications/result.html?author=Hume&country=8052&Search=Search|access-date=2 December 2021|website=search.beaconforfreedom.org|archive-date=2 December 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211202194920/http://search.beaconforfreedom.org/search/censored_publications/result.html?author=Hume&country=8052&Search=Search|url-status=usurped}}</ref>


Hume returned to Edinburgh in 1751. In the following year, the [[Faculty of Advocates]] hired him to be their Librarian, a job in which he would receive little to no pay, but which nonetheless gave him "the command of a large library".<ref group="lower-roman">"The Faculty of Advocates chose me their Librarian, an office from which I received little or no emolument, but which gave me the command of a large library." ([[#CITEREFHume1778|Hume 1776]]:11).</ref><ref name=":2" />{{Rp|11}} This resource enabled him to continue historical research for ''The History of England''. Hume's volume of ''Political Discourses'', written in 1749 and published by [[Alexander Donaldson (bookseller)|Kincaid & Donaldson]] in 1752,<ref>Sher, Richard B. 2008. [https://books.google.com/books?id=gB9liJb5o7UC ''The Enlightenment and the Book: Scottish Authors and Their Publishers in Eighteenth-Century Britain, Ireland, and Americ''a], (''Chicago Studies in Ethnomusicology'' ''Series''). Chicago: [[University of Chicago Press]]. {{ISBN|978-0-226-75254-9}}. p. 312.</ref> was the only work he considered successful on first publication.<ref name=":2" />{{Rp|10}}
Eventually, with the publication of his six-volume ''The History of England'' between 1754 and 1762, Hume achieved the fame that he coveted.{{sfn|Emerson|2009|p=98}} The volumes traced events from the [[Roman conquest of Britain|Invasion of Julius Caesar]] to the [[Glorious Revolution|Revolution of 1688]], and was a bestseller in its day.


In 1753, Hume moved from his house on Riddles Court on the [[Lawnmarket]] to a house on the [[Canongate]] at the other end of the [[Royal Mile]]. Here he lived in a tenement known as Jack's Land, immediately west of the still surviving Shoemakers Land.<ref>grant's Old and New Edinburgh vol.3 p.9</ref>
Hume was also a longtime friend of bookseller [[Andrew Millar]], who sold Hume's ''History'' (after acquiring the rights from Scottish bookseller Gavin Hamilton<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.millar-project.ed.ac.uk/manuscripts/html_output/2.html|title=The manuscripts, Letter from David Hume to Andrew Millar, 12 April, 1755.|website=www.millar-project.ed.ac.uk|access-date=2016-06-01|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160115092006/http://www.millar-project.ed.ac.uk/manuscripts/html_output/2.html|archive-date=15 January 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref>), although the relationship was sometimes complicated. Letters between them illuminate both men's interest in the success of the ''History''.


Eventually, with the publication of his six-volume ''The History of England'' between 1754 and 1762, Hume achieved the fame that he coveted.{{sfn|Emerson|2009|p=98}} The volumes traced events from the [[Roman conquest of Britain|Invasion of Julius Caesar]] to the [[Glorious Revolution|Revolution of 1688]] and was a bestseller in its day. Hume was also a longtime friend of bookseller [[Andrew Millar]], who sold Hume's ''History'' (after acquiring the rights from Scottish bookseller Gavin Hamilton<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.millar-project.ed.ac.uk/manuscripts/html_output/2.html|title=The manuscripts, Letter from David Hume to Andrew Millar, 12 April, 1755.|website=millar-project.ed.ac.uk|access-date=1 June 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160115092006/http://www.millar-project.ed.ac.uk/manuscripts/html_output/2.html|archive-date=15 January 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref>), although the relationship was sometimes complicated. Letters between them illuminate both men's interest in the success of the ''History''. In 1762 Hume moved from Jack's Land on the [[Canongate]] to James Court on the [[Lawnmarket]]. He sold the house to [[James Boswell]] in 1766.<ref>Grants Old and New Edinburgh vol 1, p. 97</ref>
In 1762 Hume moved from Jack's Land on the [[Canongate]] to James Court on the [[Lawnmarket]]. He sold the house to [[James Boswell]] in 1766.<ref>Grants Old and New Edinburgh vol1 p.97</ref>


===Later years===
== Later life ==
[[File:Old Calton David Hume.jpg|thumb|David Hume's mausoleum by [[Robert Adam]] in the [[Old Calton Burial Ground]], Edinburgh.]]
From 1763 to 1765, Hume was invited to attend [[Francis Seymour-Conway, 1st Marquess of Hertford|Lord Hertford]] in [[Paris]], where he became secretary to the British embassy.<ref>Klibansky, Raymond and Mossner, Ernest C. (eds.) (1954). ''New Letters of David Hume''. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p.77-79.</ref> Hume was well received in Paris, and while there he met with [[Isaac de Pinto]].<ref>{{Cite journal|title=Hume and Isaac de Pinto|author=Popkin, Richard H.|authorlink=Richard Popkin|year=1970|journal=Texas Studies in Literature and Language|volume=12|issue=3|pages=417–430|jstor = 40754109}}</ref> In 1766, Hume left Paris to accompany [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau]] to England. Once in England, Hume and Rousseau fell out.<ref name=wsj11042017>"An Enlightened Friendship", Ruth Scurr, Wall Street Journal, 4 November 2017</ref> Hume was sufficiently worried about the damage to his reputation from the quarrel with Rousseau (who is generally believed to have suffered from [[paranoia]]) to have authored an account of the dispute, which he titled, appropriately enough ''"A concise and genuine account of the dispute between Mr. Hume and Mr. Rousseau."''<ref>{{cite book|url=https://archive.org/details/concisegenuineac00hume|title=A concise and genuine account of the dispute between Mr. Hume and Mr. Rousseau : with the letters that passed between them during their controversy. As also, the letters of the Hon. Mr. Walpole, and Mr. D'Alembert, relative to this extraordinary affair|work=Internet Archive|publisher=London : Printed for T. Becket and P.A. de Hondt|year=1766}}</ref> In 1765, he served as British [[Chargé d'affaires]], writing "despatches to the British Secretary of State".{{sfn|Fieser|2003|p=59}} He wrote of his Paris life, "I really wish often for the plain roughness of [[The Poker Club]] of Edinburgh&nbsp;... to correct and qualify so much lusciousness".{{sfn|Mossner|1980|p=285}} In 1766, upon returning to Britain, Hume encouraged [[Francis Seymour-Conway, 1st Marquess of Hertford|Lord Hertford]] to invest in a number of slave plantations, acquired by [[George Colebrooke]] and others in the [[Windward Islands]].<ref>[http://www.the-tls.co.uk/articles/private/all-his-remedies/ Waldmann, Felix (ed.) (2014). ''Further Letters of David Hume''. Edinburgh: Edinburgh Bibliographical Society, 2014, p.65-69] (paywall)</ref> In 1767, Hume was appointed Under Secretary of State for the Northern Department. Here he wrote that he was given "all the secrets of the Kingdom". In 1769 he returned to James' Court in Edinburgh, and then lived, from 1771 until his death in 1776, at the southwest corner of St. Andrew's Square in Edinburgh's [[New Town, Edinburgh|New Town]], at what is now 21 Saint David Street.{{sfn|Burton|1846|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=CDYfAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA384&dq=hume+1767&hl=en&sa=X&ei=gUSIVLzvGIbmUsephJgK&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=hume%201767&f=false p. 384–385]}} A popular story, consistent with some historical evidence, suggests the street may have been named after Hume.{{sfn|Burton|1846|loc= [https://books.google.com/books?id=CDYfAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA384&dq=hume+1767&hl=en&sa=X&ei=gUSIVLzvGIbmUsephJgK&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAQ#v=snippet&q=%22david%20street%22&f=false p. 436, footnote 1]}}


From 1763 to 1765, Hume was invited to attend [[Francis Seymour-Conway, 1st Marquess of Hertford|Lord Hertford]] in [[Paris]], where he became secretary to the [[Embassy of the United Kingdom, Paris|British embassy in France]].<ref>Klibansky, Raymond, and Ernest C. Mossner, eds. 1954. ''New Letters of David Hume''. Oxford: [[Oxford University Press]]. pp. 77–79.</ref> Hume was well received among Parisian society, and while there he met with [[Isaac de Pinto]].<ref>{{Cite journal|title=Hume and Isaac de Pinto|author=Popkin, Richard H.|author-link=Richard Popkin|year=1970|journal=Texas Studies in Literature and Language|volume=12|issue=3|pages=417–430|jstor = 40754109}}</ref> In 1765, Hume served as a [[chargé d'affaires]] in Paris, writing "despatches to the [[Secretary of State (United Kingdom)|British Secretary of State]]".<ref>Fieser, James. 2005 [2003]. [https://www.academia.edu/20351832/A_Bibliography_of_Humes_Writings_and_Early_Responses ''A'' ''Bibliography of Hume's Writings and Early Responses''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210203172251/https://www.academia.edu/20351832/A_Bibliography_of_Humes_Writings_and_Early_Responses |date=3 February 2021 }}. Bristol: [[Thoemmes Press]]. – via [[Academia.edu]]. p. 59.</ref> He wrote of his Paris life, "I really wish often for the plain roughness of [[The Poker Club]] of Edinburgh... to correct and qualify so much lusciousness."{{sfn|Mossner|1980|p=285}} Upon returning to Britain in 1766, Hume wrote a letter to Lord Hertford after being asked to by [[George Colebrooke]]; the letter informed Lord Hertford that he had an opportunity to invest in one of Colebrooke's [[slave plantation]]s in the [[West Indies]], though Hertford ultimately decided not to do so.<ref>Waldmann, Felix, ed. 2014. [https://www.academia.edu/13249157/Further_letters_of_David_Hume_Edinburgh_Edinburgh_Bibliographical_Society_2014_ ''Further Letters of David Hume''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210427220703/https://www.academia.edu/13249157/Further_letters_of_David_Hume_Edinburgh_Edinburgh_Bibliographical_Society_2014_ |date=27 April 2021 }}. Edinburgh: Edinburgh Bibliographical Society. pp. 65–69. – via [[Academia.edu]].</ref> In June of that year, Hume facilitated the purchase of a slave plantation in [[Martinique]] on behalf of his friend, the wine merchant John Stewart, by writing to the colony's governor [[Victor-Thérèse Charpentier]].{{fact|date=July 2024}}
In the last year of his life, Hume wrote an extremely brief autobiographical essay titled "My Own Life"<ref name="andromeda.rutgers.edu">{{cite web|url=https://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Texts/humelife.html|title=David Hume, "My Own Life"|work=rutgers.edu|access-date=10 August 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160131092513/http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Texts/humelife.html|archive-date=31 January 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref> which summed up his entire life in "fewer than 5 pages",<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.oliveschreinerletters.ed.ac.uk/StanleyHumePersona.pdf |title=Archived copy |access-date=12 August 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150226004822/http://www.oliveschreinerletters.ed.ac.uk/StanleyHumePersona.pdf |archive-date=26 February 2015 |url-status=dead }}</ref> and notably contains many interesting judgments that have been of enduring interest to subsequent readers of Hume.<ref name="scholarcommons.sc.edu">{{Cite web |url=http://scholarcommons.sc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1130&context=ssl |title=Archived copy |access-date=12 August 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160305154616/http://scholarcommons.sc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1130&context=ssl |archive-date=5 March 2016 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|title= Hume's biography and Hume's philosophy| doi=10.1080/00048409912348781 | volume=77|journal=Australasian Journal of Philosophy|pages=1–25|year = 1999|last1 = Buckle|first1 = Stephen}}</ref> The scholar of 18th-century literature Donald Seibert judged it a "remarkable autobiography, even though it may lack the usual attractions of that genre. Anyone hankering for startling revelations or amusing anecdotes had better look elsewhere."<ref name="scholarcommons.sc.edu"/> Hume here confesses his belief that the "love of literary fame" had served as his "ruling passion" in life, and claims that this desire "never soured my temper, notwithstanding my frequent disappointments." One such disappointment Hume discusses in the mini-autobiography was his disappointment that with the initial literary reception of the ''Treatise'', which he claims to have overcome by means of the success of the ''Essays'': "the work was favourably received, and soon made me entirely forget my former disappointment". Hume, in his own retrospective judgment, suggested that his philosophical debut's apparent failure "had proceeded more from the manner than the matter." Hume thus suggests that "I had been guilty of a very usual indiscretion, in going to the press too early." Hume provides an unambiguous self-assessment of the relative value of his works: "my Enquiry concerning the Principles of Morals; which, in my own opinion (who ought not to judge on that subject) is of all my writings, historical, philosophical, or literary, incomparably the best." Hume also makes a number of self-assessments in the essay, writing of his social relations that "My company was not unacceptable to the young and careless, as well as to the studious and literary", noting of his complex relation to religion, as well as the state, that "though I wantonly exposed myself to the rage of both civil and religious factions, they seemed to be disarmed in my behalf of their wonted fury", and professing of his character that "My friends never had occasion to vindicate any one circumstance of my character and conduct." Hume concludes the essay with the frank admission: " I cannot say there is no vanity in making this funeral oration of myself, but I hope it is not a misplaced one; and this is a matter of fact which is easily cleared and ascertained."<ref name="andromeda.rutgers.edu"/>


According to Felix Waldmann, a former Hume Fellow at the University of Edinburgh, Hume's "puckish scepticism about the existence of religious miracles played a significant part in defining the critical outlook which underpins the practice of modern science." Waldmann also argued that Hume's views "served to reinforce the institution of racialised slavery in the later 18th century."<ref>{{cite web |last1=Waldmann |first1=Felix |title=David Hume was a brilliant philosopher but also a racist involved in slavery |url=https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/david-hume-was-brilliant-philosopher-also-racist-involved-slavery-dr-felix-waldmann-2915908 |website=[[The Scotsman]]|date=17 July 2020 |access-date=14 September 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite web | first1=David | last1=Ashton | first2=Peter | last2=Hutton | title=Edinburgh University rush to condemn David Hume shames it | url=https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/viewpoint/24011889.edinburgh-university-rush-condemn-david-hume-shames/ | website=[[The Herald (Glasgow)]] | date=28 December 2023 | access-date=25 January 2024}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | first1=David | last1=Ashton | first2=Peter | last2=Hutton | title=David Hume – An Apologia | url=https://www.euppublishing.com/doi/abs/10.3366/scot.2023.0468 | journal=[[Scottish Affairs]] | date=2023 | volume=32 | issue=3 | pages=347–364 | doi=10.3366/scot.2023.0468 | s2cid=259961720 | access-date=25 January 2024}}</ref> In 1766, Hume left Paris to accompany [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau]] to England. Once there, [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau#Quarrel with Hume|he and Rousseau fell out]],<ref name="wsj11042017">[[Ruth Scurr|Scurr, Ruth]]. 4 November 2017. "An Enlightened Friendship." ''[[The Wall Street Journal|Wall Street Journal]]''.</ref> leaving Hume sufficiently worried about the damage to his reputation from the quarrel with Rousseau that he would author an account of the dispute, titling it ''"A concise and genuine account of the dispute between Mr. Hume and Mr. Rousseau''".<ref>Becker, T., and P. A. de Hondt, trans. 1766. ''[[iarchive:concisegenuineac00hume/page/n1/mode/2up|A concise and genuine account of the dispute between Mr. Hume and Mr. Rousseau: with the letters that passed between them during their controversy]]''. London. Available in [https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/ecco/004851885.0001.000/1:3?rgn=div1;view=fulltext full text]. Retrieved 19 May 2020.</ref>
Diarist and biographer [[James Boswell]] saw Hume a few weeks before his death from a form of abdominal cancer. Hume told him he sincerely believed it a "most unreasonable fancy" that there might be life after death.{{sfn|Boswell|1970|p= ?}} This meeting was dramatised in semi-fictional form for the [[BBC]] by [[Michael Ignatieff]] as ''Dialogue in the Dark''.{{sfn|Bassett|2012|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=MkTSD5UHu8AC&pg=PA272&dq=dark+hume+Michael+Ignatieff&hl=en&sa=X&ei=YEuIVIzbEseqUbzng_gP&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=dark%20hume%20Michael%20Ignatieff&f=false p. 272]}} Hume asked that his body be interred in a "simple Roman tomb". In his Will he requests that it be inscribed only with his name and the year of his birth and death, "leaving it to Posterity to add the Rest".{{sfn|Mossner|1980|p=591}} It stands, as he wished it, on the southwestern slope of [[Calton Hill]], in the [[Old Calton Cemetery]]. Adam Smith later recounted Hume's amusing speculation that he might ask [[Charon (mythology)|Charon]] to allow him a few more years of life in order to see "the downfall of some of the prevailing systems of superstition." The ferryman replied, "You loitering rogue, that will not happen these many hundred years&nbsp;... Get into the boat this instant".{{sfn|Hume|1789|p=xxi}}


In 1767, Hume was appointed [[Secretary of State for the Northern Department|Under Secretary of State for the Northern Department]]. Here, he wrote that he was given "all the secrets of the Kingdom". In 1769 he returned to James' Court in Edinburgh, where he would live from 1771 until his death in 1776. Hume's nephew and namesake, [[David Hume (advocate)|David Hume of Ninewells]] (1757–1838), was a co-founder of the [[Royal Society of Edinburgh]] in 1783. He was a Professor of Scots Law at [[Edinburgh University]] and rose to be Principal Clerk of Session in the Scottish [[High Court of Justiciary|High Court]] and Baron of the Exchequer. He is buried with his uncle in Old Calton Cemetery.<ref>{{cite book|url=https://www.royalsoced.org.uk/cms/files/fellows/biographical_index/fells_indexp1.pdf|title=Biographical Index of Former Fellows of the Royal Society of Edinburgh 1783–2002|year=2006|publisher=The Royal Society of Edinburgh|isbn=978-0-902198-84-5|access-date=14 November 2016|archive-date=24 January 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130124115814/http://www.royalsoced.org.uk/cms/files/fellows/biographical_index/fells_indexp1.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref>
==Writings==
In the introduction to ''A Treatise of Human Nature'', Hume wrote, "'Tis evident, that all the sciences have a relation, more or less, to human nature&nbsp;... Even Mathematics, Natural Philosophy, and Natural Religion, are in some measure dependent on the science of Man." He also wrote that the [[science of man]] is the "only solid foundation for the other sciences" and that the method for this science requires both experience and observation as the foundations of a logical argument.{{sfn|Hume|1739|p=7}} On this aspect of Hume's thought, philosophical historian [[Frederick Copleston]] wrote that it was Hume's aim to apply to the science of man the method of experimental philosophy (the term that was current at the time to imply [[Natural philosophy]]), and that "Hume's plan is to extend to philosophy in general the methodological limitations of [[classical mechanics|Newtonian physics]]".{{sfn|Copleston|1999|pp=405–406}}


=== Autobiography ===
Until recently, Hume was seen as a forerunner of [[logical positivism]]; a form of anti-[[metaphysics|metaphysical]] empiricism. According to the logical positivists, unless a statement could be verified by experience, or else was true or false by definition (i.e. either [[tautology (logic)|tautological]] or [[contradiction|contradictory]]), then it was meaningless (this is a summary statement of their [[verificationism|verification principle]]). Hume, on this view, was a proto-positivist, who, in his philosophical writings, attempted to demonstrate how ordinary propositions about objects, causal relations, the self, and so on, are [[logical equivalence|semantically equivalent]] to propositions about one's experiences.{{sfn|Ayer|1946|p=40}}{{failed verification|date=March 2015}}
In the last year of his life, Hume wrote an extremely brief autobiographical essay titled "My Own Life",<ref name=":2" /> summing up his entire life in "fewer than 5 pages";<ref>Stanley, Liz. 2006. "[https://web.archive.org/web/20150226004822/http://www.oliveschreinerletters.ed.ac.uk/StanleyHumePersona.pdf The Writing of David Hume’s 'My Own Life': The Persona of the Philosopher and the Philosopher Manqué]." ''Auto/Biography'' 14:1–19. {{doi|10.1191/0967550706ab051oa}}.</ref> it contains many interesting judgments that have been of enduring interest to subsequent readers of Hume.<ref name=":3">Siebert, Donald T. 1984. "[https://web.archive.org/web/20160305154616/http://scholarcommons.sc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1130&context=ssl David Hume's Last Words: The Importance of My Own Life]." ''Studies in Scottish Literature'' 19(1):132–147. Retrieved 18 May 2020.</ref><ref>{{cite journal|title= Hume's biography and Hume's philosophy| doi=10.1080/00048409912348781 | volume=77|journal=Australasian Journal of Philosophy|pages=1–25|year = 1999|last1 = Buckle|first1 = Stephen}}</ref> Donald Seibert (1984), a scholar of 18th-century literature, judged it a "remarkable autobiography, even though it may lack the usual attractions of that genre. Anyone hankering for startling revelations or amusing anecdotes had better look elsewhere."<ref name=":3" />


Despite condemning vanity as a dangerous passion,<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Galvagni|first=Enrico|date=1 June 2020|title=Hume on Pride, Vanity and Society|journal=Journal of Scottish Philosophy|volume=18|issue=2|pages=157–173|doi=10.3366/jsp.2020.0265|s2cid=225800023|issn=1479-6651|url=https://philarchive.org/rec/GALHOP-4 }}</ref> in his autobiography Hume confesses his belief that the "love of literary fame" had served as his "ruling passion" in life, and claims that this desire "never soured my temper, notwithstanding my frequent disappointments". One such disappointment Hume discusses in this account is in the initial literary reception of the ''Treatise'', which he claims to have overcome by means of the success of the ''Essays'': "the work was favourably received, and soon made me entirely forget my former disappointment". Hume, in his own retrospective judgment, argues that his philosophical debut's apparent failure "had proceeded more from the manner than the matter". He thus suggests that "I had been guilty of a very usual indiscretion, in going to the press too early."
Many commentators have since rejected this understanding of Humean empiricism, stressing an [[epistemology|epistemological]] (rather than a [[semantics|semantic]]) reading of his project.<ref name=CSW>See e.g. {{harvtxt|Craig|1987|loc=Ch. 2}}, {{harvtxt|Strawson|2014|p= ?}}, and {{harvtxt|Wright|1983|p= ?}}</ref> According to this opposing view, Hume's empiricism consisted in the idea that it is our knowledge, and not our ability to conceive, that is restricted to what can be experienced. Hume thought that we can form beliefs about that which extends beyond any possible experience, through the operation of faculties such as custom and the imagination, but he was sceptical about claims to knowledge on this basis.


Hume also provides an unambiguous self-assessment of the relative value of his works: that "my Enquiry concerning the Principles of Morals; which, in my own opinion (who ought not to judge on that subject) is of all my writings, historical, philosophical, or literary, incomparably the best." He also wrote of his social relations: "My company was not unacceptable to the young and careless, as well as to the studious and literary", noting of his complex relation to religion, as well as to the state, that "though I wantonly exposed myself to the rage of both civil and religious factions, they seemed to be disarmed in my behalf of their wonted fury". He goes on to profess of his character: "My friends never had occasion to vindicate any one circumstance of my character and conduct." Hume concludes the essay with a frank admission:<ref name=":2" />
===Impressions and ideas===


<blockquote>I cannot say there is no vanity in making this funeral oration of myself, but I hope it is not a misplaced one; and this is a matter of fact which is easily cleared and ascertained.</blockquote>
A central doctrine of Hume's philosophy, stated in the very first lines of the ''Treatise'', is that the mind consists of perceptions, or the mental objects which are present to it, and which divide into two categories: ''impressions'' and ''ideas''. Hume's Treatise thus begins: "All the perceptions of the human mind resolve themselves into two distinct kinds, which I shall call {{smallcaps|impressions}} and {{smallcaps|ideas}}." Hume states that "I believe it will not be very necessary to employ many words in explaining this distinction" and commentators have generally taken Hume to mean the distinction between [[feeling]] and [[thinking]].<ref>{{cite book|url=https://global.oup.com/academic/product/cognition-and-commitment-in-humes-philosophy-9780195159592?cc=us&lang=en&|title=Cognition and Commitment in Hume's Philosophy|work=oup.com|isbn=9780195159592|publisher=Oxford University Press|date=2002-11-28}}</ref> Controversially, Hume may regard the difference as in some sense a matter of degree, as he takes "impressions" to be distinguished from ideas, on the basis of their force, liveliness, and vivacity, or what Henry Allison calls the "FLV criterion" in his book on Hume.<ref name="global.oup.com">{{cite book|url=https://global.oup.com/academic/product/custom-and-reason-in-hume-9780199532889?cc=us&lang=en&|title=Custom and Reason in Hume|work=oup.com|isbn=9780199532889|publisher=Oxford University Press|date=2008-10-15}}</ref> Ideas are therefore "faint" impressions. For example, experiencing the painful sensation of touching the handle of a hot pan is more forceful than simply thinking about touching a hot pan. According to Hume, impressions are meant to be the original form of all our ideas, and Don Garret has thus coined the term "the copy principle" to refer to Hume's doctrine that all ideas are ultimately all copied from some original impression, whether it be a passion or sensation, from which they derive.<ref name="global.oup.com"/><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.routledge.com/products/9780415283342|title=Hume|date=30 October 2014|work=routledge.com}}</ref>


=== Death ===
After establishing the forcefulness of impressions and ideas, these two categories are further broken down into simple and complex: simple impressions and ideas, and complex impressions and ideas. Hume states that “simple perceptions or impressions and ideas are such as admit of no distinction nor separation,” while “the complex are the contrary to these, and may be distinguished into parts.”<ref>Hume, D. (1896). A Treatise of Human Nature (L. A. Selby-Bigge, Ed.). Wotton-under-Edge: Oxford: Clarendon Press. Retrieved May 4, 2017, from Center for Security Studies.</ref> When looking at an apple, a person experiences a variety of color-sensations, which Hume sees as a complex impression. Similarly, a person experiences a variety of taste-sensations, tactile-sensations, and smell-sensations when biting into an apple, with the overall sensation again being a complex impression. Thinking about an apple allows a person to form complex ideas, which are made of similar parts as the complex impressions they were developed from, but which are also less forceful. Hume believes that complex perceptions can be broken down into smaller and smaller parts until perceptions are reached that have no parts of their own, and these perceptions are thereby referred to as being simple.
[[File:Old Calton David Hume.jpg|thumb|David Hume's mausoleum by [[Robert Adam]] in the [[Old Calton Burial Ground]], Edinburgh]]
A person's imagination, regardless of how boundless it may seem, is confined to the mind's ability to recombine the information it has already acquired from the body's sensory experience (the ideas that have been derived from impressions). In addition, "as our imagination takes our most basic ideas and leads us to form new ones, it is directed by three principles of association, namely, resemblance, contiguity, and cause and effect."<ref>[http://www.iep.utm.edu/hume/ Fieser, J. (2011, July 1). David Hume (1711-1776). In Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved March 8, 2017]</ref> The principle of resemblance refers to the tendency of ideas to become associated if the objects they represent resemble one another. For example, a person looking at an illustration of a flower can conceive of an idea of the physical flower because the idea of the illustrated object is associated with the idea of the physical object. The principle of contiguity describes the tendency of ideas to become associated if the objects they represent are near to each other in time or space, such as when the thought of one crayon in a box leads a person to think of the crayon contiguous to it. Finally, the principle of cause and effect refers to the tendency of ideas to become associated if the objects they represent are causally related, which explains how remembering a broken window can make someone think of the baseball that caused the window to shatter.


Diarist and biographer [[James Boswell]] saw Hume a few weeks before his death from a form of [[Stomach cancer|abdominal cancer]]. Hume told him that he sincerely believed it a "most unreasonable fancy" that there might be life after death.<ref>Weis, Charles M., and Frederick A. Pottle, eds. 1970. {{Cite book|url=https://archive.org/details/boswellinextreme00bosw|title=Boswell in Extremes, 1776–1778|year=1970|publisher=New York, McGraw-Hill|url-access=limited}} New York: McGraw Hill. {{OL|5217786M}}. {{LCCN|75102461}}.</ref>{{sfn|Bassett|2012|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=MkTSD5UHu8AC&dq=dark+hume+Michael+Ignatieff&pg=PA272 p. 272]: this meeting was dramatised in semi-fictional form for the [[BBC]] by [[Michael Ignatieff]] as ''Dialogue in the Dark''}} Hume asked that his body be interred in a "simple Roman tomb", requesting in his [[Will and testament|will]] that it be inscribed only with his name and the year of his birth and death, "leaving it to Posterity to add the Rest".{{sfn|Mossner|1980|p=591}}
Hume elaborates more on this last principle of cause and effect. When a person observes that one object or event consistently produces the same object or event, it results in "an expectation that a particular event (a 'cause') will be followed by another event (an 'effect') previously and constantly associated with it."<ref>{{Cite book|url=http://http/%3A%2F%2Flink.galegroup.com%2Fapps%2Fdoc%2FCX3450000731%2FGVRL%3Fu%3Dredm07619%26sid%3DGVRL%26xid%3D628c8aaa|title=Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy|first=David Fate|last=Norton|editor-first=Robert|editor-last=Audi|date=14 August 1999|publisher=Cambridge University Press|pages=398–403|accessdate=14 August 2019|via=Gale}}{{Dead link|date=August 2019 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref> Hume calls this principle custom, or habit, saying that "custom...renders our experience useful to us, and makes us expect, for the future, a similar train of events with those which have appeared in the past."<ref>Hume, D. (1990). An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. New York, NY: Anchor/Doubleday.</ref> However, even though custom can serve as a guide in life, it still only represents an expectation. In other words, "experience cannot establish a necessary connection between cause and effect, because we can imagine without contradiction a case where the cause does not produce its usual effect...the reason why we mistakenly infer that there is something in the cause that necessarily produces its effect is because our past experiences have habituated us to think in this way."<ref>Drefcinski, S. (n.d.). [http://people.uwplatt.edu/~drefcins/humeencyclopediaentry.html A Very Brief Summary of David Hume] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170509231819/http://people.uwplatt.edu/~drefcins/humeencyclopediaentry.html |date=9 May 2017 }}. Retrieved 8 March 2017.</ref> Continuing this idea, Hume argues that "only in the pure realm of ideas, logic, and mathematics, not contingent on the direct sense awareness of reality, [can] causation safely...be applied – all other sciences are reduced to probability."<ref>An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. (2010). Masterplots, Fourth Edition, 1–3.</ref> He uses this scepticism to reject metaphysics and many theological views on the basis that they are not grounded in fact and observations, and are therefore beyond the reach of human understanding.


David Hume died at the southwest corner of St. Andrew's Square in Edinburgh's [[New Town, Edinburgh|New Town]], at what is now 21 Saint David Street.{{sfn|Burton|1846|loc=[https://archive.org/details/lifeandcorrespo02burtgoog/page/n410 <!-- quote=hume 1767. --> pp. 384–385]}} A popular story, consistent with some historical evidence and with the help of coincidence, suggests that the street was named after Hume.{{sfn|Burton|1846|loc=[https://archive.org/details/lifeandcorrespo02burtgoog/page/n410 <!-- pg=384 quote="david street". --> p. 436, footnote 1]}}
===Induction and causation<!--linked from 'Problem of induction'-->===
The cornerstone of Hume's epistemology is the [[problem of induction]]. This may be the area of Hume's thought where his scepticism about human powers of reason is most pronounced.{{sfn| Kenyon|Craig|1985|p= ?}} The problem revolves around the plausibility of [[inductive reasoning]], that is, reasoning from the observed behaviour of objects to their behaviour when unobserved. As Hume wrote, induction concerns how things behave when they go "beyond the present testimony of the senses, or the records of our memory".{{sfn|Hume|1777|p= 26}} Hume argues that we tend to believe that things behave in a regular manner, meaning that patterns in the behaviour of objects seem to persist into the future, and throughout the unobserved present.{{sfn|Atherton|1999|loc= [https://books.google.com/books?id=9u56iKhWQu4C&pg=PA202&dq=hume+Uniformity+of+Nature&hl=en&sa=X&ei=DVOIVKTQAon4UojxgJgL&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=hume%20Uniformity%20of%20Nature&f=false pp. 202–203]}} Hume's argument is that we cannot rationally justify the claim that nature will continue to be uniform, as justification comes in only two varieties—demonstrative reasoning and probable reasoning{{refn|These are Hume's terms. In modern parlance, ''demonstration'' may be termed ''[[deductive reasoning]]'', while ''probability'' may be termed ''[[inductive reasoning]]''.{{sfn|Millican|1996|p= ?}}|group=note}}—and both of these are inadequate. With regard to demonstrative reasoning, Hume argues that the uniformity principle cannot be demonstrated, as it is "consistent and conceivable" that nature might stop being regular.{{sfn|Hume|1777|p= 111}} Turning to probable reasoning, Hume argues that we cannot hold that nature will continue to be uniform because it has been in the past. As this is using the very sort of reasoning (induction) that is under question, it would be [[circular reasoning]].{{sfn|Hume|1777|p= 115}} Thus, no form of justification will rationally warrant our inductive inferences.


His tomb stands, as he wished it, on the southwestern slope of [[Calton Hill]], in the [[Old Calton Cemetery]]. [[Adam Smith]] later recounted Hume's amusing speculation that he might ask [[Charon]], [[Hades]]' ferryman, to allow him a few more years of life in order to see "the downfall of some of the prevailing systems of superstition". The ferryman replied, "You loitering rogue, that will not happen these many hundred years.… Get into the boat this instant."<ref>Smith, Adam. 1789 [1776]. "[https://archive.org/stream/historyenglandf00humegoog#page/n21/mode/2up Letter from Adam Smith, LL.D. to William Strathan, Esq.]" pp. xix–xxiv in ''The History of England, from the Invasion of Julius Cæsar to the Revolution in 1688'' 1. London: [[Thomas Cadell (publisher)|Thomas Cadell]] and [[Longman]]. p. xxi.</ref>
Hume's solution to this problem is to argue that, rather than reason, natural instinct explains the human practice of making inductive inferences. He asserts that "Nature, by an absolute and uncontroulable necessity has determin'd us to judge as well as to breathe and feel." In 1985, and in agreement with Hume, philosopher John D. Kenyon writes: "Reason might manage to raise a doubt about the truth of a conclusion of natural inductive inference just for a moment&nbsp;... but the sheer agreeableness of animal faith will protect us from excessive caution and sterile suspension of belief."{{sfn|Kenyon|Craig|1985|p= 254}} Years after Hume, commentators such as [[Charles Sanders Peirce]] have demurred from Hume's solution,{{sfn|Harris|2004|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=uBbfizzKTDoC&lpg=PA42&pg=PA42&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false p. 42]}} while some, such as Kant and [[Karl Popper]], saw that Hume's analysis "had posed a most fundamental challenge to all human knowledge claims."{{sfn|Popkin|2014}}


== Writings ==
The notion of [[Causality|causation]] is closely linked to the problem of induction. According to Hume, we reason inductively by associating constantly conjoined events. It is the mental act of association that is the basis of our concept of causation. There are at least three interpretations of Hume's theory of causation represented in the literature: (1) the logical positivist; (2) the sceptical realist; and (3) the quasi-realist.{{sfn|Read|Richman|2002|pp=13–14 and 69}}
''[[A Treatise of Human Nature]]'' begins with the introduction: "'Tis evident, that all the sciences have a relation, more or less, to human nature.… Even Mathematics, Natural Philosophy, and Natural Religion, are in some measure dependent on the science of Man."<ref name=":4" /> The [[science of man]], as Hume explains, is the "only solid foundation for the other sciences" and that the method for this science requires both experience and observation as the foundations of a logical argument.<ref name=":4" />{{Rp|7}} In regards to this, philosophical historian [[Frederick Copleston]] (1999) suggests that it was Hume's aim to apply to the science of man the method of experimental philosophy (the term that was current at the time to imply [[natural philosophy]]), and that "Hume's plan is to extend to philosophy in general the methodological limitations of [[classical mechanics|Newtonian physics]]."<ref>[[Frederick Copleston|Copleston, Frederick]]. 1999 [1960]. ''[[A History of Philosophy (Copleston)|A History of Philosophy]]'' 6. Kent: [[Burns & Oates|Burns & Oats]]. {{ISBN|978-0-86012-299-9}}. [https://books.google.com/books?id=BMjrs7-gk9oC Lay summary] via Google Books. pp. 405–406.</ref>


Until recently, Hume was seen as a forerunner of [[logical positivism]], a form of anti-[[metaphysics|metaphysical]] empiricism. According to the logical positivists (in summary of their [[verificationism|verification principle]]), unless a statement could be verified by experience, or else was true or false by definition (i.e., either [[tautology (logic)|tautological]] or [[contradiction|contradictory]]), then it was meaningless. Hume, on this view, was a protopositivist, who, in his philosophical writings, attempted to demonstrate the ways in which ordinary propositions about objects, causal relations, the self, and so on, are [[logical equivalence|semantically equivalent]] to propositions about one's experiences.<ref>Hume, David. 2007 [1748]. ''[[An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding]]'', edited by [[Peter Millican|P. Millican]]. Oxford: [[Oxford University Press]]. {{ISBN|978-0-19-152635-0}}. {{OCLC|314220887}}. pp. xii-xv.</ref>
Hume acknowledged that there are events constantly unfolding, humanity cannot guarantee that these events are caused by events prior or if they are independent instances. Hume opposed the widely accepted theory of Causation that 'all events have a specific course or reason.' Therefore, Hume crafted his own theory of causation, which he formed through his empiricist and sceptic beliefs. He split Causation, into two realms "All the objects of human reason or enquiry may naturally be divided into two kinds, to wit, Relations of Ideas, and Matters of Fact".<ref>. "Davidhume.org." Texts - An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding (1748, 1777). Web. 19 Mar. 2017.</ref> Relations of Ideas are a priori, and represent universal bonds between ideas that mark the cornerstones of human thought. Matters of Fact are dependent on the observer and experience. They are often not universally held to be true among multiple persons. Hume was an Empiricist, meaning he believed "causes and effects are discoverable not by reason, but by experience".<ref>."Davidhume.org." Texts - An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding (1748, 1777). Web. 19 Mar. 2017.</ref> Hume later goes on to say that even with the perspective of the past, humanity cannot dictate future events because thoughts of the past are limited, compared to the possibilities for the future. Hume's separation between Matters of Fact and Relations of Ideas is often referred to as "[[Hume's fork]]".<ref name=SEP>William Edward Morris, [https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hume/ "David Hume"], [[The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]] (21 May 2014), Edward N. Zalta (ed.)</ref>


Many commentators have since rejected this understanding of Humean empiricism, stressing an [[epistemology|epistemological]] (rather than a [[semantics|semantic]]) reading of his project.<ref name="CSW" group="lower-roman">For example, see {{harvtxt|Craig|1987|loc=Ch. 2}}; {{harvtxt|Strawson|2014|p=}}; and {{harvtxt|Wright|1983}}.</ref> According to this opposing view, Hume's empiricism consisted in the idea that it is our knowledge, and not our ability to conceive, that is restricted to what can be experienced. Hume thought that we can form beliefs about that which extends beyond any possible experience, through the operation of faculties such as custom and the imagination, but he was sceptical about claims to knowledge on this basis.
Hume explains his theory of Causation and causal inference by division into three different parts. In these three branches he explains his ideas, in addition to comparing and contrasting his views to his predecessors. These branches are the Critical Phase, the Constructive Phase, and Belief.<ref name="Davidhume 1748">"Davidhume.org." Texts - An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding (1748, 1777). Web. 19 Mar. 2017.</ref> In the Critical Phase, Hume denies his predecessors' theories of causation. Next, Hume uses the Constructive Phase to resolve any doubts the reader may have while observing the Critical Phase. "Habit or Custom" mends the gaps in reasoning that occur without the human mind even realizing it. Associating ideas has become second nature to the human mind. It "makes us expect for the future, a similar train of events with those which have appeared in the past".<ref name="Davidhume 1748"/> However, Hume says that this association cannot be trusted because the span of the human mind to comprehend the past is not necessarily applicable to the wide and distant future. This leads Hume to the third branch of causal inference, Belief. Belief is what drives the human mind to hold that expectancy of the future based on past experience. Throughout his explanation of causal inference, Hume is arguing that the future is not certain to be repetition of the past and the only way to justify induction is through uniformity.


=== Impressions and ideas ===
The [[logical positivism|logical positivist]] interpretation is that Hume analyses causal propositions, such as "A caused B", in terms of regularities in perception: "A causes B" is equivalent to "Whenever A-type events happen, B-type ones follow", where "whenever" refers to all possible perceptions.<ref>For this account of Hume's views on causation cf. {{harvtxt|Ayer|1946|pp=40–42}}</ref> In his ''Treatise of Human Nature'', Hume wrote:


A central doctrine of Hume's philosophy, stated in the very first lines of the ''[[A Treatise of Human Nature|Treatise of Human Nature]]'', is that the mind consists of perceptions, or the mental objects which are present to it, and which divide into two categories: "All the perceptions of the human mind resolve themselves into two distinct kinds, which I shall call {{smallcaps|impressions}} and {{smallcaps|ideas}}." Hume believed that it would "not be very necessary to employ many words in explaining this distinction", which commentators have generally taken to mean the distinction between ''[[feeling]]'' and ''[[Thought|thinking]]''.<ref name=":9">Garrett, Don. 2002. ''Cognition and Commitment in Hume's Philosophy''. Oxford: [[Oxford University Press]]. {{ISBN|978-0-19-515959-2}}.</ref> Controversially, Hume, in some sense, may regard the distinction as a matter of degree, as he takes ''impressions'' to be distinguished from ideas on the basis of their force, liveliness, and vivacity{{mdash}}what [[Henry E. Allison]] (2008) calls the "FLV criterion."<ref name=":10">[[Henry E. Allison|Allison, Henry E.]] 2008. ''Custom and Reason in Hume: A Kantian Reading of the First Book of the Treatise''. Oxford: [[Oxford University Press]]. {{ISBN|978-0-19-953288-9}}.</ref> ''Ideas'' are therefore "faint" impressions. For example, experiencing the painful sensation of touching a hot pan's handle is more forceful than simply thinking about touching a hot pan. According to Hume, ''impressions'' are meant to be the original form of all our ideas. From this, Don Garrett (2002) has coined the term ''copy principle,<ref name=":9" />'' referring to Hume's doctrine that all ideas are ultimately copied from some original impression, whether it be a passion or sensation, from which they derive.<ref name=":10" />
<blockquote>
power and necessity&nbsp;... are&nbsp;... qualities of perceptions, not of objects&nbsp;... felt by the soul and not perceiv'd externally in bodies.{{sfn|Hume|1739|p=167}}
</blockquote>


==== Simple and complex ====
This view is rejected by sceptical [[Philosophical realism|realists]], who argue that Hume thought that causation amounts to more than just the regular succession of events.<ref name=CSW /> Hume said that when two events are causally conjoined, a necessary connection underpins the conjunction:
After establishing the forcefulness of impressions and ideas, these two categories are further broken down into ''simple'' and ''complex'': "simple perceptions or impressions and ideas are such as admit of no distinction nor separation", whereas "the complex are the contrary to these, and may be distinguished into parts".<ref name=":4">Hume, David. 1739. [https://web.archive.org/web/20180712120258/http://www.davidhume.org/texts/thn.html ''A Treatise of Human Nature'' 1]. London: John Noon. Retrieved 19 May 2020.</ref> When looking at an apple, a person experiences a variety of colour-sensations{{mdash}}what Hume notes as a complex impression. Similarly, a person experiences a variety of taste-sensations, tactile-sensations, and smell-sensations when biting into an apple, with the overall sensation{{mdash}}again, a complex impression. Thinking about an apple allows a person to form complex ideas, which are made of similar parts as the complex impressions they were developed from, but which are also less forceful. Hume believes that complex perceptions can be broken down into smaller and smaller parts until perceptions are reached that have no parts of their own, and these perceptions are thus referred to as simple.


==== Principles of association ====
<blockquote>
Regardless of how boundless it may seem; a person's imagination is confined to the mind's ability to recombine the information it has already acquired from the body's sensory experience (the ideas that have been derived from impressions). In addition, "as our imagination takes our most basic ideas and leads us to form new ones, it is directed by three principles of association, namely, resemblance, contiguity, and cause and effect":<ref>Fieser, James. 2011. "[https://www.iep.utm.edu/hume/ David Hume (1711–1776)]." ''[[Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]''. Retrieved 19 May 2020.</ref>
Shall we rest contented with these two relations of contiguity and succession, as affording a complete idea of causation? By no means&nbsp;... there is a ''necessary connexion'' to be taken into consideration.{{sfn|Hume|1739|p=78|ps=, original emphasis}}
* The '''principle of resemblance''' refers to the tendency of ideas to become associated if the objects they represent resemble one another. For example, someone looking at an illustration of a flower can conceive an idea of the physical flower because the idea of the illustrated object is associated with the physical object's idea.
</blockquote>
* The '''principle of contiguity''' describes the tendency of ideas to become associated if the objects they represent are near to each other in time or space, such as when the thought of a crayon in a box leads one to think of the crayon contiguous to it.
* The '''principle of cause''' '''and effect''' refers to the tendency of ideas to become associated if the objects they represent are causally related, which explains how remembering a broken window can make someone think of a ball that had caused the window to shatter.


Hume elaborates more on the last principle, explaining that, when somebody observes that one object or event consistently produces the same object or event, that results in "an expectation that a particular event (a 'cause') will be followed by another event (an 'effect') previously and constantly associated with it".<ref name=":11">Norton, David Fate. 1999 [1993]. "[https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?p=GVRL&u=redm07619&id=GALE%7CCX3450000731&v=2.1&it=r&sid=GVRL&asid=628c8aaa Hume, David]." Pp. 398–403 in ''[[The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy|Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy]]'' (2nd ed.), edited by [[Robert Audi|R. Audi]]. Cambridge: [[Cambridge University Press]]. Retrieved 18 May 2020. – via [[Gale (publisher)|Gale]].</ref> Hume calls this principle ''custom'', or ''habit'', saying that "custom...renders our experience useful to us, and makes us expect, for the future, a similar train of events with those which have appeared in the past".<ref name=":5">Hume, David. 1990 [1748]. ''[[An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding]]''. New York: [[Anchor Books|Anchor]]/[[Doubleday (publisher)|Doubleday]].</ref> However, even though custom can serve as a guide in life, it still only represents an expectation. In other words:<ref>Drefcinski, Shane. (1998). "[http://people.uwplatt.edu/~drefcins/humeencyclopediaentry.html A Very Brief Summary of David Hume]." ''Dr. Shane Drefcinski''. US: [[University of Wisconsin–Platteville]]. {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170509231819/http://people.uwplatt.edu/~drefcins/humeencyclopediaentry.html|date=9 May 2017}}. Retrieved 19 May 2020.</ref>
Philosopher Angela Coventry writes that, for Hume, "there is nothing in any particular instance of cause and effect involving external objects which suggests the idea of power or necessary connection" and that "we are ignorant of the powers that operate between objects".{{sfn|Coventry|2006|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=gq348MmuojAC&dq=hume+coventry&q=%22effect+involving%22#v=snippet&q=%22effect%20involving%22&f=false pp. 91–92]}} However, while denying the possibility of knowing the powers between objects, Hume accepted the causal principle, writing, "I never asserted so absurd a proposition as that something could arise without a cause."{{sfn|Hume|2011|p=187}}
<blockquote>Experience cannot establish a necessary connection between cause and effect, because we can imagine without contradiction a case where the cause does not produce its usual effect…the reason why we mistakenly infer that there is something in the cause that necessarily produces its effect is because our past experiences have habituated us to think in this way. </blockquote>


Continuing this idea, Hume argues that "only in the pure realm of ideas, logic, and mathematics, not contingent on the direct sense awareness of reality, [can] causation safely…be applied—all other sciences are reduced to probability".<ref>Hume, David. 2010 [1778]. ''[[An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding]]''. In ''[[Masterplots]]'' (4th ed.). pp. 1–3<!--find direct ref-->.</ref><ref name=":5" /> He uses this scepticism to reject metaphysics and many theological views on the basis that they are not grounded in fact and observations, and are therefore beyond the reach of human understanding.
It has been argued that, while Hume did not think causation is reducible to pure regularity, he was not a fully fledged realist either. Philosopher [[Simon Blackburn]] calls this a [[quasi-realism|quasi-realist]] reading.{{sfn|Blackburn|1990|p= ?}} Blackburn writes that "Someone talking of cause is voicing a distinct mental set: he is by no means in the same state as someone merely describing regular sequences."<ref>Quoted by {{harvtxt|Dauer|2010|p=97}}</ref> In Hume's words, "nothing is more usual than to apply to external bodies every internal sensation, which they occasion".{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=78, fn 17}}


=== Induction and causation<!--linked from 'Problem of induction'--> ===
===The self===
The cornerstone of Hume's epistemology is the [[problem of induction]]. This may be the area of Hume's thought where his scepticism about human powers of reason is most pronounced.{{sfn| Kenyon|Craig|1985|p=?}} The problem revolves around the plausibility of [[inductive reasoning]], that is, reasoning from the observed behaviour of objects to their behaviour when unobserved. As Hume wrote, induction concerns how things behave when they go "beyond the present testimony of the senses, or the records of our memory".{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=26}} Hume argues that we tend to believe that things behave in a regular manner, meaning that patterns in the behaviour of objects seem to persist into the future, and throughout the unobserved present.{{sfn|Atherton|1999|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=9u56iKhWQu4C&dq=hume+Uniformity+of+Nature&pg=PA202 pp. 202–203]}} Hume's argument is that we cannot rationally justify the claim that nature will continue to be uniform, as justification comes in only two varieties—demonstrative reasoning and probable reasoning<ref group="lower-roman">These are Hume's terms. In modern parlance, ''demonstration'' may be termed ''[[deductive reasoning]]'', while ''probability'' may be termed ''[[inductive reasoning]]''.
[[File:DavidHume.jpg|thumb|left|Statue of Hume by [[Alexander Stoddart]] on the [[Royal Mile]] in Edinburgh]]
Empiricist philosophers, such as Hume and [[George Berkeley|Berkeley]], favoured the [[bundle theory]] of [[personal identity]].{{sfn|Dicker|2002|p=15}} In this theory, "the mind itself, far from being an independent power, is simply 'a bundle of perceptions' without unity or cohesive quality".{{sfn|Maurer|2013}} The self is nothing but a bundle of experiences linked by the relations of causation and resemblance; or, more accurately, that the empirically warranted idea of the self is just the idea of such a bundle. This view is forwarded by, for example, positivist interpreters, who saw Hume as suggesting that terms such as "self", "person", or "mind" referred to collections of "sense-contents".{{sfn|Ayer|1946|pp=135–136}} A modern-day version of the bundle theory of the mind has been advanced by [[Derek Parfit]] in his ''[[Reasons and Persons]]''.{{sfn|Parfit|1984|p= ?}}


[[Peter Millican|Millican, Peter]]. 1996. ''[https://web.archive.org/web/20171020020313/http://www.davidhume.org/papers/millican/1996PhD.pdf Hume, Induction and Probability]''. Leeds: [[University of Leeds]]. Archived from the [http://www.davidhume.org/papers/millican/1996PhD.pdf original] on 20 October 2017. Retrieved 6 June 2014.</ref>—and both of these are inadequate. With regard to demonstrative reasoning, Hume argues that the uniformity principle cannot be demonstrated, as it is "consistent and conceivable" that nature might stop being regular.{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=111}} Turning to probable reasoning, Hume argues that we cannot hold that nature will continue to be uniform because it has been in the past. As this is using the very sort of reasoning (induction) that is under question, it would be [[circular reasoning]].{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=115}} Thus, no form of justification will rationally warrant our inductive inferences.
However, some philosophers have criticised Hume's bundle-theory interpretation of personal identity. They argue that distinct selves can have perceptions that stand in relations of similarity and causality with one another. Thus, perceptions must already come parcelled into distinct "bundles" before they can be associated according to the relations of similarity and causality. In other words, the mind must already possess a unity that cannot be generated, or constituted, by these relations alone. Since the bundle-theory interpretation portrays Hume as answering an [[ontology|ontological]] question, philosophers, like [[Galen Strawson]], who see Hume as not very concerned with such questions have queried whether the view is really Hume's. Instead, it is suggested by Strawson that Hume might have been answering an epistemological question about the causal origin of our concept of the self.{{sfn|Strawson|2011|p= ?}} In the Appendix to the ''Treatise'', Hume declares himself dissatisfied with his earlier account of personal identity in Book 1. Philosopher Corliss Swain notes that "Commentators agree that if Hume did find some new problem" when he reviewed the section on personal identity, "he wasn't forthcoming about its nature in the Appendix."{{sfn|Swain|2008|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=Qoh7_nZbBjYC&pg=PA143&dq=hume+blackwell+new+problem&hl=en&sa=X&ei=SmODVNGVG8G9UeJV&ved=0CCIQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=hume%20blackwell%20new%20problem&f=false p. 142]}} One interpretation of Hume's view of the self has been argued for by philosopher and psychologist [[James Giles (philosopher)|James Giles]]. According to his view, Hume is not arguing for a bundle theory, which is a form of reductionism, but rather for an eliminative view of the self. That is, rather than reducing the self to a bundle of perceptions, Hume is rejecting the idea of the self altogether. On this interpretation, Hume is proposing a "[[Personal identity#The no-self theory|no-self theory]]" and thus has much in common with [[Buddhism|Buddhist]] thought (see ''[[anattā]]'').{{sfn|Giles|1993|p= ?}} On this point, psychologist [[Alison Gopnik]] has argued that Hume was in a position to learn about Buddhist thought during his time in France in the 1730s.{{sfn|Gopnik|2009|p= ?}}


Hume's solution to this problem is to argue that, rather than reason, natural instinct explains the human practice of making inductive inferences. He asserts that "Nature, by an absolute and uncontroulable {{sic}} necessity has determin'd us to judge as well as to breathe and feel." In 1985, and in agreement with Hume, John D. Kenyon writes:{{sfn|Kenyon|Craig|1985|p=254}}
===Practical reason===
"Practical reason" relates to whether standards or principles exist that are also authoritative for all rational beings, dictating people's intentions and actions. Hume is mainly considered an anti-rationalist, denying the possibility for practical reason, although other philosophers such as [[Christine Korsgaard]], [[Jean Hampton]], and [[Elijah Millgram]] claim that Hume is not so much of an anti-rationalist as he is just a sceptic of practical reason.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Mason |first=Michelle |authorlink=Michelle Mason |volume=31 |issue=2 |date=September 2005 |title=Hume and Humeans on Practical Reason |url=http://www.humesociety.org/hs/issues/v31n2/mason/mason-v31n2.pdf |publisher=[[Hume Studies]] |accessdate=2016-05-27 |journal= |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160617090548/http://www.humesociety.org/hs/issues/v31n2/mason/mason-v31n2.pdf |archive-date=17 June 2016 |url-status=dead }}</ref>


<blockquote>Reason might manage to raise a doubt about the truth of a conclusion of natural inductive inference just for a moment&nbsp;... but the sheer agreeableness of animal faith will protect us from excessive caution and sterile suspension of belief.</blockquote>
Hume denied the existence of practical reason as a principle because he claimed reason does not have any effect on morality, since morality is capable of producing effects in people that reason alone cannot create. As Hume explains in ''A Treatise of Human Nature'' (1740): "Morals excite passions, and produce or prevent actions. Reason of itself is utterly impotent in this particular. The rules of morality, therefore, are not conclusions of our reason."<ref>{{cite book |last=Hume |first=David|date=1740 |edition=1978|title=A Treatise of Human Nature |location=Oxford |publisher=Clarendon P |page=457}}</ref>


Others, such as [[Charles Sanders Peirce]], have demurred from Hume's solution,{{sfn|Harris|2004|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=uBbfizzKTDoC&pg=PA42 p. 42]}} while some, such as Kant and [[Karl Popper]], have thought that Hume's analysis has "posed a most fundamental challenge to all human knowledge claims".{{sfn|Popkin|2014}}
Since practical reason is supposed to regulate our actions (in theory), Hume denied practical reason on the grounds that reason cannot directly oppose passions. As Hume puts it, "Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office than to serve and obey them." Reason is less significant than any passion because reason has no original influence, while "A passion is an original existence, or, if you will, modification of existence".<ref>{{cite book|last=Hume |first=David|date=1740 |edition=1978 |title=A Treatise of Human Nature |location=Oxford |publisher=Clarendon P |page=415}}</ref>


The notion of [[Causality|causation]] is closely linked to the problem of induction. According to Hume, we reason inductively by associating constantly conjoined events. It is the mental act of association that is the basis of our concept of causation. At least three interpretations of Hume's theory of causation are represented in the literature:{{sfn|Read|Richman|2002|pp=13–14, 69}}
Practical reason is also concerned with the value of actions rather than the truth of propositions,<ref>{{cite web |url= http://plato.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/encyclopedia/archinfo.cgi?entry=practical-reason |title=Practical Reason |last=Wallace |first=Jay |date=2014 | encyclopedia=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |access-date=29 April 2016}}</ref> so Hume believed that reason's shortcoming of affecting morality proved that practical reason could not be authoritative for all rational beings, since morality was essential for dictating people's intentions and actions.


# the [[Logical positivism|logical positivist]];
===Ethics===
# the sceptical realist; and
# the [[Quasi-realism|quasi-realist]].

Hume acknowledged that there are events constantly unfolding, and humanity cannot guarantee that these events are caused by prior events or are independent instances. He opposed the widely accepted theory of causation that 'all events have a specific course or reason'. Therefore, Hume crafted his own theory of causation, formed through his empiricist and sceptic beliefs. He split causation into two realms: "All the objects of human reason or enquiry may naturally be divided into two kinds, to wit, Relations of Ideas, and Matters of Fact."<ref name=":5" /> Relations of Ideas are ''a priori'' and represent universal bonds between ideas that mark the cornerstones of human thought. Matters of Fact are dependent on the observer and experience. They are often not universally held to be true among multiple persons. Hume was an Empiricist, meaning he believed "causes and effects are discoverable not by reason, but by experience".<ref name=":5" /> He goes on to say that, even with the perspective of the past, humanity cannot dictate future events because thoughts of the past are limited, compared to the possibilities for the future. Hume's separation between Matters of Fact and Relations of Ideas is often referred to as "[[Hume's fork]]."<ref name="SEP">Morris, William Edward, and Charlotte R. Brown. 2019 [2001]. "[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hume/ David Hume]." ''[[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]''. Stanford: Metaphysics Research Lab. Retrieved 18 May 2020.</ref>

Hume explains his theory of causation and causal inference by division into three different parts. In these three branches he explains his ideas and compares and contrasts his views to his predecessors. These branches are the Critical Phase, the Constructive Phase, and Belief.<ref name="Davidhume 1748">"Davidhume.org." Texts – An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding (1748, 1777). Web. 19 March 2017.<!--find direct ref--></ref> In the Critical Phase, Hume denies his predecessors' theories of causation. Next, he uses the Constructive Phase to resolve any doubts the reader may have had while observing the Critical Phase. "Habit or Custom" mends the gaps in reasoning that occur without the human mind even realising it. Associating ideas has become second nature to the human mind. It "makes us expect for the future, a similar train of events with those which have appeared in the past".<ref name=":5" /> However, Hume says that this association cannot be trusted because the span of the human mind to comprehend the past is not necessarily applicable to the wide and distant future. This leads him to the third branch of causal inference, Belief. Belief is what drives the human mind to hold that expectancy of the future is based on past experience. Throughout his explanation of causal inference, Hume is arguing that the future is not certain to be repetition of the past and that the only way to justify induction is through uniformity.

The [[logical positivism|logical positivist]] interpretation is that Hume analyses causal propositions, such as "A causes B", in terms of regularities in perception: "A causes B" is equivalent to "Whenever A-type events happen, B-type ones follow", where "whenever" refers to all possible perceptions.<ref>For this account of Hume's views on causation cf. {{harvtxt|Ayer|1946|pp=40–42}}</ref> In his ''Treatise of Human Nature'', Hume wrote:{{sfn|Hume|1739|p=167}}

<blockquote>Power and necessity…are…qualities of perceptions, not of objects…felt by the soul and not perceiv'd externally in bodies.</blockquote>

This view is rejected by sceptical [[Philosophical realism|realists]], who argue that Hume thought that causation amounts to more than just the regular succession of events.<ref name="CSW" group="lower-roman" /> Hume said that, when two events are causally conjoined, a necessary connection underpins the conjunction:{{sfn|Hume|1739|p=78|ps=, original emphasis}}

<blockquote>Shall we rest contented with these two relations of contiguity and succession, as affording a complete idea of causation? By no means…there is a ''necessary connexion'' to be taken into consideration.</blockquote>

Angela Coventry writes that, for Hume, "there is nothing in any particular instance of cause and effect involving external objects which suggests the idea of power or necessary connection" and "we are ignorant of the powers that operate between objects".{{sfn|Coventry|2006|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=gq348MmuojAC&q=%22effect+involving%22 pp. 91–92]}} However, while denying the possibility of knowing the powers between objects, Hume accepted the causal principle, writing: "I never asserted so absurd a proposition as that something could arise without a cause."{{sfn|Hume|2011|p=187}}

It has been argued that, while Hume did not think that causation is reducible to pure regularity, he was not a fully-fledged realist either. [[Simon Blackburn]] calls this a [[quasi-realism|quasi-realist]] reading,{{sfn|Blackburn|1990|p=?}} saying that "Someone talking of cause is voicing a distinct mental set: he is by no means in the same state as someone merely describing regular sequences."<ref>Quoted by {{harvtxt|Dauer|2010|p=97}}</ref> In Hume's words, "nothing is more usual than to apply to external bodies every internal sensation, which they occasion".{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=78, fn 17}}

=== 'Self' ===
Empiricist philosophers, such as Hume and [[George Berkeley|Berkeley]], favoured the [[bundle theory]] of [[personal identity]].{{sfn|Dicker|2002|p=15}} In this theory, "the mind itself, far from being an independent power, is simply 'a bundle of perceptions' without unity or cohesive quality".{{sfn|Maurer|2013}} The self is nothing but a bundle of experiences linked by the relations of causation and resemblance; or, more accurately, the empirically warranted idea of the self is just the idea of such a bundle. According to Hume:<ref name=":4" />

{{Blockquote|text=For my part, when I enter most intimately into what I call myself, I always stumble on some particular perception or other, of heat or cold, light or shade, love or hatred, pain or pleasure. I never can catch myself at any time without a perception, and never can observe any thing but the perception. When my perceptions are removed for any time, as by sound sleep; so long I am insensible of myself, and may truly be said not to exist.|title=''[[A Treatise of Human Nature]]''|source=Book I.iv, section 6}}

This view is supported by, for example, positivist interpreters, who have seen Hume as suggesting that terms such as "self", "person", or "mind" refer to collections of "sense-contents".{{sfn|Ayer|1946|pp=135–136}} A modern-day version of the bundle theory of the mind has been advanced by [[Derek Parfit]] in his ''[[Reasons and Persons]]''.{{sfn|Parfit|1984|p=?}}

However, some philosophers have criticised Hume's bundle-theory interpretation of personal identity. They argue that distinct selves can have perceptions that stand in relation to similarity and causality. Thus, perceptions must already come parcelled into distinct "bundles" before they can be associated according to the relations of similarity and causality. In other words, the mind must already possess a unity that cannot be generated, or constituted, by these relations alone. Since the bundle-theory interpretation portrays Hume as answering an [[ontology|ontological]] question, philosophers like [[Galen Strawson]] see Hume as not very concerned with such questions and have queried whether this view is really Hume's. Instead, Strawson suggests that Hume might have been answering an epistemological question about the causal origin of our concept of the self.{{sfn|Strawson|2011|p=?}} In the Appendix to the ''Treatise'', Hume declares himself dissatisfied with his earlier account of personal identity in Book 1. Corliss Swain notes that "Commentators agree that if Hume did find some new problem" when he reviewed the section on personal identity, "he wasn't forthcoming about its nature in the Appendix."{{sfn|Swain|2008|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=Qoh7_nZbBjYC&dq=hume+blackwell+new+problem&pg=PA143 p. 142]}} One interpretation of Hume's view of the self, argued for by philosopher and psychologist [[James Giles (philosopher)|James Giles]], is that Hume is not arguing for a bundle theory, which is a form of reductionism, but rather for an eliminative view of the self. Rather than reducing the self to a bundle of perceptions, Hume rejects the idea of the self altogether. On this interpretation, Hume is proposing a "[[Personal identity#The no-self theory|no-self theory]]" and thus has much in common with [[Buddhism|Buddhist]] thought (see ''[[anattā]]'').{{sfn|Giles|1993|p=?}} Psychologist [[Alison Gopnik]] has argued that Hume was in a position to learn about Buddhist thought during his time in France in the 1730s.{{sfn|Gopnik|2009|p=?}}{{sfn|Garfield|2015|pp=45, 107}}

=== Practical reason ===
''[[Practical reason]]'' relates to whether standards or principles exist that are also authoritative for all rational beings, dictating people's intentions and actions. Hume is mainly considered an anti-rationalist, denying the possibility for practical reason, although other philosophers such as [[Christine Korsgaard]], [[Jean Hampton]], and [[Elijah Millgram]] claim that Hume is not so much of an anti-rationalist as he is just a sceptic of practical reason.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Mason |first=Michelle |author-link=Michelle Mason |volume=31 |issue=2 |date=September 2005 |title=Hume and Humeans on Practical Reason |url=http://www.humesociety.org/hs/issues/v31n2/mason/mason-v31n2.pdf |publisher=[[Hume Studies]] |access-date=27 May 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160617090548/http://www.humesociety.org/hs/issues/v31n2/mason/mason-v31n2.pdf |archive-date=17 June 2016 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

Hume denied the existence of practical reason as a principle because he claimed reason does not have any effect on morality, since morality is capable of producing effects in people that reason alone cannot create. As Hume explains in ''[[A Treatise of Human Nature]]'' (1740):<ref name=":4" />{{Rp|457}}

<blockquote>Morals excite passions, and produce or prevent actions. Reason of itself is utterly impotent in this particular. The rules of morality, therefore, are not conclusions of our reason."</blockquote>

Since practical reason is supposed to regulate our actions (in theory), Hume denied practical reason on the grounds that reason cannot directly oppose passions. As Hume puts it, "Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office than to serve and obey them." Reason is less significant than any passion because reason has no original influence, while "A passion is an original existence, or, if you will, modification of existence."<ref name=":4" />{{Rp|415}}

Practical reason is also concerned with the value of actions rather than the truth of propositions,<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |url= http://plato.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/encyclopedia/archinfo.cgi?entry=practical-reason |title=Practical Reason |last=Wallace |first=Jay |year=2014 | encyclopedia=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |access-date=29 April 2016}}</ref> so Hume believed that reason's shortcoming of affecting morality proved that practical reason could not be authoritative for all rational beings, since morality was essential for dictating people's intentions and actions.

=== Ethics ===
{{see also|is–ought problem}}
{{see also|is–ought problem}}
Hume's writings on ethics began in the ''Treatise'' and were refined in his ''[[An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals]]'' (1751). His views on ethics are that "[m]oral decisions are grounded in moral sentiment." It is not knowing that governs ethical actions, but feelings.{{sfn|Cranston|2014|p=4}} Arguing that reason cannot be behind morality, he wrote:
Hume's writings on ethics began in the 1740 ''[[A Treatise of Human Nature|Treatise]]'' and were refined in his ''[[An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals]]'' (1751). He understood ''feeling'', rather than ''knowing'', as that which governs ethical actions, stating that "moral decisions are grounded in moral sentiment."{{sfn|Cranston|2014|p=4}} Arguing that reason cannot be behind morality, he wrote:{{sfn|Hume|1739|p=458}}


<blockquote>
<blockquote>
Morals excite passions, and produce or prevent actions. Reason itself is utterly impotent in this particular. The rules of morality, therefore, are not conclusions of our reason.{{sfn|Hume|1739|p=458}}
Morals excite passions, and produce or prevent actions. Reason itself is utterly impotent in this particular. The rules of morality, therefore, are not conclusions of our reason.
</blockquote>
</blockquote>


Hume's [[moral sentimentalism]] about morality was shared by his close friend Adam Smith,{{sfn|Hume|2013|p=548}}{{failed verification|date=March 2015}} and Hume and Smith were mutually influenced by the moral reflections of their older contemporary [[Francis Hutcheson (philosopher)|Francis Hutcheson]].{{sfn|Taylor|1965|p= ?}} [[Peter Singer]] claims that Hume's argument that morals cannot have a rational basis alone "would have been enough to earn him a place in the history of ethics".{{sfn|Singer|2015}}
Hume's [[Moral sense theory|''moral sentimentalism'']] was shared by his close friend [[Adam Smith]],{{sfn|Hume|2013|p=548}}{{failed verification|date=March 2015}} and the two were mutually influenced by the moral reflections of their older contemporary, [[Francis Hutcheson (philosopher)|Francis Hutcheson]].{{sfn|Taylor|1965|p=?}} [[Peter Singer]] claims that Hume's argument that morals cannot have a rational basis alone "would have been enough to earn him a place in the history of ethics."{{sfn|Singer|2015}}

Hume also put forward the ''[[is–ought problem]]'', later known as ''Hume's Law'',{{sfn|Singer|2015}} denying the possibility of logically deriving what ''ought'' to be from what ''is''. According to the ''Treatise'' (1740), in every system of morality that Hume has read, the author begins by stating facts about the world as it ''is'' but always ends up suddenly referring to what ''ought'' to be the case. Hume demands that a reason should be given for inferring what ''ought to be'' the case, from ''what is'' the case. This is because it "seems altogether inconceivable, how this new relation can be a deduction from others."{{sfn|Hume|1739|p=470}}

Hume's theory of ethics has been influential in modern-day [[Meta-ethics|meta-ethical theory]],{{sfn|Edwards|2002|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=0pGKAgAAQBAJ&dq=Hume++meta-ethics+influence&pg=PA44 p. 44]}} helping to inspire [[emotivism]],{{sfn|Humber|2008|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=dh-E6oIlCkAC&dq=Hume+emotivism+influence&pg=PA136 p. 136]}} and ethical [[expressivism]] and [[non-cognitivism]],{{sfn|Brown|2005|pp=97–100}}{{failed verification|date=March 2015}} as well as [[Allan Gibbard]]'s general theory of moral judgment and judgments of rationality.{{sfn|Angier|2012|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=ndyMavMbiZMC&dq=Hume++influence+gibbard&pg=PA114 p. 114]}}


=== Aesthetics ===
Hume also put forward the [[is–ought problem]], later called ''Hume's Law'',{{sfn|Singer|2015}} denying the possibility of logically deriving what ''ought'' to be from what ''is''. He wrote in the ''Treatise'' that in every system of morality he has read, the author begins with stating facts about the world, but then suddenly is always referring to what ought to be the case. Hume demands that a reason should be given for inferring what ought to be the case, from what is the case. This is because it "seems altogether inconceivable, how this new relation can be a deduction from others".{{sfn|Hume|1739|p=470}}
Hume's ideas about [[aesthetics]] and the [[theory of art]] are spread throughout his works, but are particularly connected with his ethical writings, and also the essays "[[Four Dissertations#Of the Standard of Taste|Of the Standard of Taste]]" and "[[Four Dissertations#Of Tragedy|Of Tragedy]]" (1757). His views are rooted in the work of [[Joseph Addison]] and Francis Hutcheson.{{sfn|Gracyk|2011|loc=ch. 1}} In the ''Treatise'' (1740), he touches on the connection between beauty and deformity and vice and virtue.{{sfn|Hume|1739|loc=Sect. VII and Sect VIII, pp. 295–304}} His later writings on the subject continue to draw parallels of beauty and deformity in art with conduct and character.{{sfn|Costelloe|2013|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=MH3_R04jW80C&q=deformity&pg=PA111 p. viii]}}


In "Standard of Taste", Hume argues that no rules can be drawn up about what is a tasteful object. However, a reliable critic of taste can be recognised as objective, sensible and unprejudiced, and as having extensive experience.{{sfn|Harris|2013|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=zWMBAQAAQBAJ&dq=hume+aesthetics&pg=PA401 p. 401]}} "Of Tragedy" addresses the question of why humans enjoy [[tragedy|tragic drama]]. Hume was concerned with the way spectators find pleasure in the sorrow and anxiety depicted in a tragedy. He argued that this was because the spectator is aware that he is witnessing a dramatic performance. There is pleasure in realising that the terrible events that are being shown are actually fiction.{{sfn|Schmidt|2010|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=ZSXlNY6xIMoC&dq=hume+of+tragedy&pg=PA324 pp. 325–326]}} Furthermore, Hume laid down rules for educating people in taste and correct conduct, and his writings in this area have been very influential on English and Anglo-Saxon aesthetics.{{sfn|Scruton|2014|p=18}}
Hume's theory of ethics has been influential in modern-day [[Meta-ethics|meta-ethical theory]],{{sfn|Edwards|2002|loc= [https://books.google.com/books?id=0pGKAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA44&dq=Hume++meta-ethics+influence&hl=en&sa=X&ei=zrmIVL_FE4iBUc-JgIAG&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Hume%20%20meta-ethics%20influence&f=false p. 44]}} helping to inspire [[emotivism]],{{sfn|Humber|2008|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=dh-E6oIlCkAC&pg=PA136&dq=Hume+emotivism+influence&hl=en&sa=X&ei=9LuIVIfhIIW1UaCIg_AM&ved=0CCIQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Hume%20emotivism%20influence&f=false p. 136]}} and ethical [[expressivism]] and [[non-cognitivism]],{{sfn|Brown|2005|pp=97–100}}{{failed verification|date=March 2015}} as well as [[Allan Gibbard]]'s general theory of moral judgment and judgments of rationality.{{sfn|Angier|2012|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=ndyMavMbiZMC&pg=PA114&dq=Hume++influence+gibbard&hl=en&sa=X&ei=0r-IVKLZF4PwUJbrgLAJ&ved=0CCgQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=Hume%20%20influence%20gibbard&f=false p. 114]}}


=== Free will, determinism, and responsibility ===
===Aesthetics===
[[File:DavidHume.jpg|thumb|left|Statue of Hume, sculpted by [[Alexander Stoddart]], on the [[Royal Mile]] in Edinburgh]]
Hume's ideas about [[aesthetics]] and the [[theory of art]] are spread throughout his works, but are particularly connected with his ethical writings, and also the essays ''[[Of the Standard of Taste]]'' and ''[[Of Tragedy]]''. His views are rooted in the work of [[Joseph Addison]] and Francis Hutcheson.{{sfn|Gracyk|2011|loc= ch. 1}} In the ''Treatise'' he wrote of the connection between beauty and deformity and vice and virtue,{{sfn|Hume|1739|loc=Sect. VII and Sect VIII, pp. 295–304}} and his later writings on this subject continue to draw parallels of beauty and deformity in art, with conduct and character.{{sfn|Costelloe|2013|loc= [https://books.google.com/books?id=MH3_R04jW80C&pg=PA111&dq=hume+aesthetics&hl=en&sa=X&ei=hvGFVMcPy_5So1I&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAQ#v=snippet&q=deformity&f=false p. viii]}}
Hume, along with [[Thomas Hobbes]], is cited as a classical compatibilist about the notions of [[free will|freedom]] and [[determinism]].{{sfn|McKenna|Coates|2015|loc=Ch. 3}}{{sfn|Russell|1995}} ''[[Compatibilism]]'' seeks to reconcile human freedom with the mechanist view that human beings are part of a deterministic universe, which is completely governed by [[physical law]]s. Hume, on this point, was influenced greatly by the scientific revolution, particularly by [[Isaac Newton|Sir Isaac Newton]].{{sfn|Wright|2010|p=?}} Hume argued that the dispute between freedom and determinism continued over 2000 years due to ambiguous terminology. He wrote: "From this circumstance alone, that a controversy has been long kept on foot…we may presume that there is some ambiguity in the expression," and that different disputants use different meanings for the same terms.{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=81}}{{sfn|Passmore|2013|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=vZRtAAAAQBAJ&dq=hume+presume+that+there+is+some+ambiguity&pg=PA73 p. 73]}}


Hume defines the concept of necessity as "the uniformity, observable in the operations of nature; where similar objects are constantly conjoined together,"{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=82}} and [[liberty]] as "a power of acting or not acting, according to the determinations of the will."{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=95}} He then argues that, according to these definitions, not only are the two compatible, but liberty ''requires'' necessity. For if our actions were not necessitated in the above sense, they would "have so little in connexion with motives, inclinations and circumstances, that one does not follow with a certain degree of uniformity from the other." But if our actions are not thus connected to the will, then our actions can never be free: they would be matters of "chance; which is universally allowed to have no existence."{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=96}} Australian philosopher [[John Passmore]] writes that confusion has arisen because "necessity" has been taken to mean "necessary connexion." Once this has been abandoned, Hume argues that "liberty and necessity will be found not to be in conflict one with another."{{sfn|Passmore|2013|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=vZRtAAAAQBAJ&dq=hume+presume+that+there+is+some+ambiguity&pg=PA73 p. 73]}}
In ''Of the Standard of Taste'', Hume argues that no rules can be drawn up about what is a tasteful object. However, a reliable critic of taste can be recognised as being objective, sensible and unprejudiced, and having extensive experience.{{sfn|Harris|2013|loc= [https://books.google.com/books?id=zWMBAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA401&dq=hume+aesthetics&hl=en&sa=X&ei=AxaGVPzBHcjsUsjwgOAP&ved=0CDsQ6AEwBTgK#v=onepage&q=hume%20aesthetics&f=false p. 401]}} ''Of Tragedy'' addresses the question of why humans enjoy [[tragedy|tragic drama]]. Hume was concerned with the way spectators find pleasure in the sorrow and anxiety depicted in a tragedy. He argued that this was because the spectator is aware that he is witnessing a dramatic performance. There is pleasure in realising that the terrible events that are being shown are actually fiction.{{sfn|Schmidt|2010|loc= [https://books.google.com/books?id=ZSXlNY6xIMoC&pg=PA324&dq=hume+of+tragedy&hl=en&sa=X&ei=RBqGVPnpBMb9Utelg9AP&ved=0CCIQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=hume%20of%20tragedy&f=false pp. 325–326]}} Furthermore, Hume laid down rules for educating people in taste and correct conduct, and his writings in this area have been very influential on English and Anglo-Saxon aesthetics.{{sfn|Scruton|2014|p=18}}


Moreover, Hume goes on to argue that in order to be held [[morally responsible]], it is required that our behaviour be caused or necessitated, for, as he wrote:{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=98|ps=, original emphasis}}
===Free will, determinism, and responsibility===
Hume, along with Thomas Hobbes, is cited as a classical [[Compatibilism|compatibilist]] about the notions of [[free will|freedom]] and [[determinism]].{{sfn|McKenna|Coates|2015|loc=Ch. 3}}{{sfn|Russell|1995}} Compatibilism seeks to reconcile human freedom with the mechanist view that human beings are part of a deterministic universe, which is completely governed by [[physical law|physical laws]]. Hume, on this point, was influenced greatly by the scientific revolution, particularly by Sir Isaac Newton.{{sfn|Wright|2010|p= ?}} Hume argued that the dispute between freedom and determinism continued over two thousand years due to ambiguous terminology. He wrote: "From this circumstance alone, that a controversy has been long kept on foot&nbsp;... we may presume that there is some ambiguity in the expression", and that different disputants use different meanings for the same terms.{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=81}}{{sfn|Passmore|2013||loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=vZRtAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA73&dq=hume+presume+that+there+is+some+ambiguity&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3zSMVOvlJYnyULWZhPgP&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=hume%20presume%20that%20there%20is%20some%20ambiguity&f=false p. 73]}}


<blockquote>Actions are, by their very nature, temporary and perishing; and where they proceed not from some ''cause'' in the character and disposition of the person who performed them, they can neither redound to his honour, if good; nor infamy, if evil.</blockquote>
Hume defines the concept of necessity as "the uniformity, observable in the operations of nature; where similar objects are constantly conjoined together",{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=82}} and [[liberty]] as "a power of acting or not acting, according to the determinations of the will".{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=95}} He then argues that, according to these definitions, not only are the two compatible, but liberty ''requires'' necessity. For if our actions were not necessitated in the above sense, they would "have so little in connexion with motives, inclinations and circumstances, that one does not follow with a certain degree of uniformity from the other". But if our actions are not thus connected to the will, then our actions can never be free: they would be matters of "chance; which is universally allowed to have no existence".{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=96}} Australian philosopher [[John Passmore]] writes that confusion has arisen because "necessity" has been taken to mean "necessary connexion". Once this has been abandoned, Hume argues that "liberty and necessity will be found not to be in conflict one with another".{{sfn|Passmore|2013||loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=vZRtAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA73&dq=hume+presume+that+there+is+some+ambiguity&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3zSMVOvlJYnyULWZhPgP&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=hume%20presume%20that%20there%20is%20some%20ambiguity&f=false p. 73]}}


Hume describes the link between causality and our capacity to rationally make a decision from this an inference of the mind. Human beings assess a situation based upon certain predetermined events and from that form a choice. Hume believes that this choice is made spontaneously. Hume calls this form of decision making the liberty of spontaneity.{{sfn|Mounce|Mounce|2002|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=qyepEVWo0v8C&dq=hume+liberty+of+spontaneity&pg=PA66 p. 66]}}
Moreover, Hume goes on to argue that in order to be held [[morally responsible]], it is required that our behaviour be caused or necessitated, for, as he wrote:


Education writer Richard Wright considers that Hume's position rejects a famous moral puzzle attributed to French philosopher [[Jean Buridan]]. The [[Buridan's ass]] puzzle describes a donkey that is hungry. This donkey has separate bales of hay on both sides, which are of equal distances from him. The problem concerns which bale the donkey chooses. Buridan was said to believe that the donkey would die, because he has no [[autonomy]]. The donkey is incapable of forming a rational decision as there is no motive to choose one bale of hay over the other. However, human beings are different, because a human who is placed in a position where he is forced to choose one loaf of bread over another will make a decision to take one in lieu of the other. For Buridan, humans have the capacity of autonomy, and he recognises the choice that is ultimately made will be based on chance, as both loaves of bread are exactly the same. However, Wright says that Hume completely rejects this notion, arguing that a human will spontaneously act in such a situation because he is faced with impending death if he fails to do so. Such a decision is not made on the basis of chance, but rather on necessity and spontaneity, given the prior predetermined events leading up to the predicament.{{sfn|Wright|2010|p=?}}
<blockquote>Actions are, by their very nature, temporary and perishing; and where they proceed not from some ''cause'' in the character and disposition of the person who performed them, they can neither redound to his honour, if good; nor infamy, if evil.{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=98|ps=, original emphasis}}</blockquote>


Hume's argument is supported by modern-day compatibilists such as [[R. E. Hobart]], a pseudonym of philosopher Dickinson S. Miller.<ref>See e.g. {{harvtxt|Hobart|1934|p=?}} and {{harvtxt|Carroll|Markosian|2010|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=f6bcZq4_4gUC&dq=hume+hobart+Free+Will+as+Involving&pg=PA54 p. 54, note 11]}}</ref> However, [[P. F. Strawson]] argued that the issue of whether we hold one another morally responsible does not ultimately depend on the truth or falsity of a metaphysical thesis such as determinism. This is because our so holding one another is a non-rational human sentiment that is not predicated on such theses.{{sfn|Strawson|2008|p=?}}{{sfn|Prasad|1995|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=66b8FJmZQ38C&q=hume+moral%2C+reactive p. 348]}}
Hume describes the link between causality and our capacity to rationally make a decision from this an inference of the mind. Human beings assess a situation based upon certain predetermined events and from that form a choice. Hume believes that this choice is made spontaneously. Hume calls this form of decision making the liberty of spontaneity.{{sfn|Mounce|Mounce|2002|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=qyepEVWo0v8C&pg=PA66&dq=hume+liberty+of+spontaneity&hl=en&sa=X&ei=bjeMVOKlG4L6UJe1gNgL&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=hume%20liberty%20of%20spontaneity&f=false p. 66]}}


=== Religion ===
Education writer Richard Wright considers that Hume's position rejects a famous moral puzzle attributed to French philosopher [[Jean Buridan]]. The [[Buridan's ass]] puzzle describes a donkey that is hungry. This donkey has on both sides of him separate bales of hay, which are of equal distances from him. The problem concerns which bale the donkey chooses. Buridan was said to believe that the donkey would die, because he has no [[autonomy]]. The donkey is incapable of forming a rational decision as there is no motive to choose one bale of hay over the other. However, human beings are different, because a human who is placed in a position where he is forced to choose one loaf of bread over another will make a decision to take one in lieu of the other. For Buridan, humans have the capacity of autonomy, and he recognises the choice that is ultimately made will be based on chance, as both loaves of bread are exactly the same. However, Wright says that Hume completely rejects this notion, arguing that a human will spontaneously act in such a situation because he is faced with impending death if he fails to do so. Such a decision is not made on the basis of chance, but rather on necessity and spontaneity, given the prior predetermined events leading up to the predicament.{{sfn|Wright|2010|p= ?}}
Philosopher [[Paul Russell (philosopher)|Paul Russell]] (2005) contends that Hume wrote "on almost every central question in the philosophy of religion", and that these writings "are among the most important and influential contributions on this topic."<ref name="plat" /> Touching on the philosophy, psychology, history, and anthropology of religious thought, Hume's 1757 dissertation "[[Four Dissertations#The Natural History of Religion|The Natural History of Religion]]" argues that the [[monotheistic]] religions of [[Judaism]], [[Christianity]], and [[Islam]] all derive from earlier [[polytheistic]] religions. He went on to suggest that all religious belief "traces, in the end, to dread of the unknown".{{sfn|O'Connor|2013|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=ntygPAezQJUC&dq=hume+religion&pg=PA7 pp. 7–8]}} Hume had also written on religious subjects in the first ''Enquiry'', as well as later in the ''[[Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion]]''.<ref name="plat" />


==== Religious views ====
Hume's argument is supported by modern-day compatibilists such as [[R. E. Hobart]], a pseudonym of philosopher Dickinson S. Miller.<ref>See e.g. {{harvtxt|Hobart|1934|p=?}} and {{harvtxt|Carroll|Markosian|2010|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=f6bcZq4_4gUC&pg=PA54&dq=hume+hobart+Free+Will+as+Involving&hl=en&sa=X&ei=vjiMVJalEcjzUIu6gdgL&ved=0CC4Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=hume%20hobart%20Free%20Will%20as%20Involving&f=false p. 54, note 11]}}</ref> However, [[P. F. Strawson]] argued that the issue of whether we hold one another morally responsible does not ultimately depend on the truth or falsity of a metaphysical thesis such as determinism. This is because our so holding one another is a non-rational human sentiment that is not predicated on such theses.{{sfn|Strawson|2008|p=?}}{{sfn|Prasad|1995|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=66b8FJmZQ38C&dq=hume+strawson&q=hume+moral%2C+reactive#v=snippet&q=hume%20moral%2C%20reactive&f=false p. 348]}}
Although he wrote a great deal about religion, Hume's personal views have been the subject of much debate.<ref group="lower-roman">For example, see {{harvtxt|Russell|2008}}; {{harvtxt|O'Connor|2013}}; and {{harvtxt|Norton|1993}}.</ref> Some modern critics have described Hume's religious views as [[Agnosticism|agnostic]] or have described him as a "[[Pyrrhonism|Pyrrhonian skeptic]]".<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last=Mullen|first=Shirley|year=2003|title=David Hume and a Christian Perspective on History|journal=Fides et Historia|volume=XXXV|pages=49–60}}</ref> Contemporaries considered him to be an [[Atheism|atheist]], or at least un-Christian, enough so that the [[Church of Scotland]] seriously considered bringing charges of infidelity against him.{{sfn|Mossner|1980|p=206}} Evidence of his un-Christian beliefs can especially be found in his writings on miracles, in which he attempts to separate [[historical method]] from the narrative accounts of miracles.<ref name=":0" /> Nevertheless, modern scholars have tended to dismiss the claims of Hume's contemporaries describing him as an atheist as coming from [[Religious intolerance|religiously intolerant]] people who did not understand Hume’s philosophy.<ref>{{Citation |last1=Russell |first1=Paul |title=Hume on Religion |date=2021 |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2021/entries/hume-religion/ |encyclopedia=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |editor-last=Zalta |editor-first=Edward N. |edition=Winter 2021 |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=31 May 2022 |last2=Kraal |first2=Anders}}</ref> The fact that contemporaries suspected him of atheism is exemplified by a story Hume liked to tell:{{sfn|Scharfstein|1998|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=iZQy2lu70bwC&dq=hume++fishwives&pg=PA454 p. 454, footnote]}}


<blockquote>The best theologian he ever met, he used to say, was the old Edinburgh fishwife who, having recognized him as Hume the atheist, refused to pull him out of the bog into which he had fallen until he declared he was a Christian and repeated the Lord's prayer.</blockquote>
===Writings on religion===
The ''[[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]'' states that Hume wrote "on almost every central question in the philosophy of religion", and these writings "are among the most important and influential contributions on this topic."{{sfn|Russell|2014|loc=[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hume-religion/ Hume on Religion]}} They touch on the philosophy, psychology, history, and anthropology of religious thought. Hume's 1757 dissertation, ''[[Four Dissertations|The Natural History of Religion]]'', covers all of these topics and argues that the [[monotheistic]] religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam all derive from earlier [[polytheistic]] religions. He also suggested that all religious belief "traces, in the end, to dread of the unknown."{{sfn|O'Connor|2013|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=ntygPAezQJUC&pg=PA7&dq=hume+religion&hl=en&sa=X&ei=1s_GU_r3KPPH7Abi94GgAg&ved=0CEUQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=hume%20religion&f=false pp. 7–8]}} Hume had also written on religious subjects in the first ''Enquiry'', as well as later in the ''[[Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion]]''.{{sfn|Russell|2014|loc=[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hume-religion/ Ch. 1]}}


However, in works such as "Of Superstition and Enthusiasm", Hume specifically seems to support the standard religious views of his time and place.<ref name=":12">Hume, David. 1777 [1741]. "[https://davidhume.org/texts/empl1/se Of Superstition and Enthusiasm]." Essay X in ''[https://davidhume.org/texts/empl1/full Essays Moral, Political, and Literary (1742–1754)].'' Retrieved 19 May 2020. [https://web.archive.org/web/20180710222300/http://www.davidhume.org/texts/emp.html Archived]. Also available: [http://www.english.upenn.edu/~mgamer/Etexts/hume.superstition.html Full text] and [https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/704#Hume_0059_254 Liberty Fund edition].</ref> This still meant that he could be very critical of the [[Catholic Church]], dismissing it with the standard [[Protestant]] accusations of superstition and idolatry,{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=51}}<ref name=":12" />{{Rp|70}} as well as dismissing as idolatry what his compatriots saw as uncivilised beliefs.{{sfn|Hume|1757|p=34}} He also considered extreme Protestant sects, the members of which he called "enthusiasts", to be corrupters of religion.{{sfn|Hume|1741|pp=73–76}} By contrast, in "[[Four Dissertations#The Natural History of Religion|The Natural History of Religion]]", Hume presents arguments suggesting that [[polytheism]] had much to commend it over [[monotheism]].{{sfn|Hume|1757|p=63}} Additionally, when mentioning religion as a factor in his ''History of England'', Hume uses it to show the deleterious effect it has on human progress. In his ''[[A Treatise of Human Nature|Treatise of Human Nature]]'', Hume wrote: "Generally speaking, the errors in religions are dangerous; those in philosophy only ridiculous."<ref name=":0" />
====Religious views====
Although he wrote a great deal about religion, Hume's personal views have been the subject of much debate.<ref>E.g in {{harvtxt|Russell|2008}}, {{harvtxt|O'Connor|2013}}, and {{harvtxt|Norton|1993}}</ref> Some modern critics have described Hume's religious views as agnostic or have described him as a "Pyrrhonian skeptic."<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last=Mullen|first=Shirley|date=2003|title=David Hume and a Christian Perspective on History|url=|journal=Fides et Historia|volume=XXXV|pages=49–60|via=}}</ref> Contemporaries considered him to be an atheist, or at least un-Christian, and the [[Church of Scotland]] seriously considered bringing charges of infidelity against him.{{sfn|Mossner|1980|p=206}} Evidence of his un-Christian beliefs can be seen in his writings on miracles. In his treatise on miracles, he attempts to separate historical method from the narrative accounts of miracles.<ref name=":0" /> The fact that contemporaries thought that he may have been an atheist is exemplified by a story Hume liked to tell:


Lou Reich (1998) argues that Hume was a [[Religious naturalism|religious naturalist]] and rejects interpretations of Hume as an atheist.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Reich |first=Lou |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1RaPQgAACAAJ |title=Hume's Religious Naturalism |date=1998 |publisher=University Press of America |isbn=978-0-7618-0982-1 |pages=1–3, 41–42 |language=en}}</ref> Paul Russell (2008) writes that Hume was plainly sceptical about religious belief, although perhaps not to the extent of complete atheism. He suggests that Hume's position is best characterised by the term "[[irreligion]],"<ref>[[Paul Russell (philosopher)|Russell, Paul]]. 2008. ''The Riddle of Hume's Treatise: Skepticism, Naturalism, and Irreligion''. Oxford: [[Oxford University Press]]. {{ISBN|978-0-19-975152-5}}.</ref> while philosopher David O'Connor (2013) argues that Hume's final position was "weakly [[deistic]]". For O'Connor, Hume's "position is deeply ironic. This is because, while inclining towards a weak form of [[deism]], he seriously doubts that we can ever find a sufficiently favourable balance of evidence to justify accepting any religious position." He adds that Hume "did not believe in the God of standard theism ... but he did not rule out all concepts of deity", and that "ambiguity suited his purposes, and this creates difficulty in definitively pinning down his final position on religion".{{sfn|O'Connor|2013|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=ntygPAezQJUC&dq=%22but+he+did+not+rule+out+all+concepts+of+deity%22&pg=PA19 pp. 11, 19]}}
<blockquote>The best theologian he ever met, he used to say, was the old Edinburgh fishwife who, having recognized him as Hume the atheist, refused to pull him out of the bog into which he had fallen until he declared he was a Christian and repeated the Lord's prayer.{{sfn|Scharfstein|1998|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=iZQy2lu70bwC&pg=PA454&dq=hume++fishwives&hl=en&sa=X&ei=wi3KU6jOGMaM7AaRoIDYBQ&ved=0CFEQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=hume%20%20fishwives&f=false p. 454, footnote]}}</blockquote>


==== Design argument ====
However, in works such as ''Of Superstition and Enthusiasm'', Hume specifically seems to support the standard religious views of his time and place. This still meant that he could be very critical of the [[Catholic Church]], dismissing it with the standard [[Protestant]] accusations of superstition and idolatry,{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=51}}{{sfn|Hume|1741|p=70}} as well as dismissing as idolatry what his compatriots saw as uncivilised beliefs.{{sfn|Hume|1757|p=34}} He also considered extreme Protestant sects, the members of which he called "enthusiasts", to be corrupters of religion.{{sfn|Hume|1741|pp=73–76}} By contrast, in his ''[[The Natural History of Religion]]'', Hume presented arguments suggesting that [[polytheism]] had much to commend it over [[monotheism]].{{sfn|Hume|1757|p=63}} Additionally, when mentioning religion as a factor in his ''History of England'', Hume uses it to show the deleterious effect it has on human progress. In his ''Treatise on Human Nature'', Hume wrote: "Generally speaking, the errors in religions are dangerous; those in philosophy only ridiculous."<ref name=":0" />
One of the traditional topics of [[natural theology]] is that of the [[existence of God]], and one of the ''[[a posteriori]]'' arguments for this is the ''argument from design'' or the [[teleological argument]]. The argument is that the existence of God can be proved by the design that is obvious in the complexity of the world, which ''[[Encyclopædia Britannica]]'' states is "the most popular", because it is:<ref name="RE">[[#{{harvid|RE}}|RE]]</ref>{{unreliable source?|date=April 2015}}


<blockquote>...the most accessible of the theistic arguments ... which identifies evidences of design in nature, inferring from them a divine designer ... The fact that the universe as a whole is a coherent and efficiently functioning system likewise, in this view, indicates a divine intelligence behind it.</blockquote>
Philosopher [[Paul Russell (philosopher)|Paul Russell]] writes that Hume was plainly sceptical about religious belief, although perhaps not to the extent of complete atheism. He suggests that Hume's position is best characterised by the term "irreligion",{{sfn|Russell|2008|pp=202, 204–205, and 284}} while philosopher David O'Connor argues that Hume's final position was "weakly [[deistic]]". For O'Connor, Hume's "position is deeply ironic. This is because, while inclining towards a weak form of [[deism]], he seriously doubts that we can ever find a sufficiently favourable balance of evidence to justify accepting any religious position." He adds that Hume "did not believe in the God of standard theism&nbsp;... but he did not rule out all concepts of deity", and that "ambiguity suited his purposes, and this creates difficulty in definitively pinning down his final position on religion".{{sfn|O'Connor|2013|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=ntygPAezQJUC&pg=PA19&lpg=PA19&dq=%22but+he+did+not+rule+out+all+concepts+of+deity%22&source=bl&ots=ulLs4-GWED&sig=XcJNdJXP3jP-N0ynFZ8wroDbAUg&hl=en&sa=X&ei=CtwmVd-BKueP7AbA14CYDg&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=%22but%20he%20did%20not%20rule%20out%20all%20concepts%20of%20deity%22&f=false pp.11, 19]}}


In ''[[An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding]]'', Hume wrote that the design argument seems to depend upon our experience, and its proponents "always suppose the universe, an effect quite singular and unparalleled, to be the proof of a Deity, a cause no less singular and unparalleled".{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=148}} Philosopher Louise E. Loeb (2010) notes that Hume is saying that only experience and observation can be our guide to making inferences about the conjunction between events. However, according to Hume:{{sfn|Loeb|2010|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=6ECxW_2tAf0C&dq=companion+hume+observe+neither+God+nor+other+universes&pg=PA118 p. 118]}}
====Design argument====
One of the traditional topics of [[natural theology]] is that of the [[existence of God]], and one of the ''[[a posteriori]]'' arguments for this is the ''argument from design'' or the [[teleological argument]]. The argument is that the existence of God can be proved by the design that is obvious in the complexity of the world. ''Encyclopædia Britannica'' states that this is "the most popular, because [it is] the most accessible of the theistic arguments&nbsp;... which identifies evidences of design in nature, inferring from them a divine designer&nbsp;... The fact that the universe as a whole is a coherent and efficiently functioning system likewise, in this view, indicates a divine intelligence behind it."<ref name="RE">[[#{{harvid|RE}}|RE]]</ref>{{unreliable source?|date=April 2015}}


In ''An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding'', Hume wrote that the design argument seems to depend upon our experience, and its proponents "always suppose the universe, an effect quite singular and unparalleled, to be the proof of a Deity, a cause no less singular and unparalleled".{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=148}} Philosopher Louise E. Loeb notes that Hume is saying that only experience and observation can be our guide to making inferences about the conjunction between events. However, according to Hume, "we observe neither God nor other universes, and hence no conjunction involving them. There is no observed conjunction to ground an inference either to extended objects or to God, as unobserved causes."{{sfn|Loeb|2010|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=6ECxW_2tAf0C&pg=PA118&dq=companion+hume+observe+neither+God+nor+other+universes&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Z0OMVMfjJob1UvykgLAN&ved=0CCIQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=companion%20hume%20observe%20neither%20God%20nor%20other%20universes&f=false p. 118]}}
<blockquote>We observe neither God nor other universes, and hence no conjunction involving them. There is no observed conjunction to ground an inference either to extended objects or to God, as unobserved causes.</blockquote>


Hume also criticised the argument in his ''Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion'' (1779). In this, he suggested that, even if the world is a more or less smoothly functioning system, this may only be a result of the "chance permutations of particles falling into a temporary or permanent self-sustaining order, which thus has the appearance of design."<ref name=RE />
Hume also criticised the argument in his ''[[Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion]]'' (1779). Hume proposes a finite universe with a finite number of particles. Given infinite time, these particles could randomly fall into any arrangement, including our seemingly designed world.[https://www.gutenberg.org/files/4583/4583-h/4583-h.htm#:~:text=For%20instance%2C%20what,scruple%20this%20determination.]


A century later, the idea of order without design was rendered more plausible by Charles Darwin's discovery that the adaptations of the forms of life are a result of the [[natural selection]] of inherited characteristics.<ref name=RE /> For philosopher James D. Madden, it is "Hume, rivaled only by Darwin, [who] has done the most to undermine in principle our confidence in arguments from design among all figures in the Western intellectual tradition."{{sfn|Madden|2005|loc= [https://books.google.com/books?id=UKSZeRnuyjAC&pg=PA150&dq=teleological+god+hume+darwin&hl=en&sa=X&ei=FvrIU4uBMYOu7AaV1oGQCw&ved=0CCEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=teleological%20god%20hume%20darwin&f=false p. 150, emphasis removed.]}}
A century later, the idea of order without design was rendered more plausible by Charles Darwin's discovery that the adaptations of the forms of life result from the [[natural selection]] of inherited characteristics.<ref name="RE" />{{unreliable source?|date=April 2015}} For philosopher James D. Madden, it is "Hume, rivaled only by Darwin, [who] has done the most to undermine in principle our confidence in arguments from design among all figures in the Western intellectual tradition".{{sfn|Madden|2005|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=UKSZeRnuyjAC&dq=teleological+god+hume+darwin&pg=PA150 p. 150, emphasis removed.]}}


Finally, Hume discussed a version of the [[anthropic principle]], which is the idea that theories of the universe are constrained by the need to allow for man's existence in it as an observer. Hume has his sceptical mouthpiece Philo suggest that there may have been many worlds, produced by an incompetent designer, whom he called a "stupid mechanic". In his ''Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion'', Hume wrote:
Finally, Hume discussed a version of the [[anthropic principle]], which is the idea that theories of the universe are constrained by the need to allow for man's existence in it as an observer. Hume has his sceptical mouthpiece Philo suggest that there may have been many worlds, produced by an incompetent designer, whom he called a "stupid mechanic". In his ''Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion'', Hume wrote:{{sfn|Hume|1779|p=167}}


<blockquote>Many worlds might have been botched and bungled throughout an eternity, ere this system was struck out: much labour lost: many fruitless trials made: and a slow, but continued improvement carried on during infinite ages in the art of world-making.{{sfn|Hume|1779|p=167}}
<blockquote>Many worlds might have been botched and bungled throughout an eternity, ere this system was struck out: much labour lost: many fruitless trials made: and a slow, but continued improvement carried on during infinite ages in the art of world-making.
</blockquote>
</blockquote>


American philosopher [[Daniel Dennett]] has suggested that this mechanical explanation of teleology, although "obviously&nbsp;... an amusing philosophical fantasy", anticipated the notion of natural selection, the 'continued improvement' being like "any Darwinian selection algorithm."{{sfn|Dennett|2009|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=i1tNI9646Q4C&pg=PA620&dq=hume++anthropic+principle&hl=en&sa=X&ei=4zXKU_nGCqaw7Aa-w4GAAg&ved=0CEMQ6AEwBjgK#v=onepage&q=hume%20%20anthropic%20principle&f=false pp. 620–621]}}
American philosopher [[Daniel Dennett]] has suggested that this mechanical explanation of teleology, although "obviously&nbsp;... an amusing philosophical fantasy", anticipated the notion of natural selection, the 'continued improvement' being like "any Darwinian selection algorithm".{{sfn|Dennett|2009|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=i1tNI9646Q4C&dq=hume++anthropic+principle&pg=PA620 pp. 620–621]}}


====Problem of miracles====
==== Problem of miracles ====
{{main|Of Miracles}}
{{main|Of Miracles}}


In his discussion of [[miracle]]s, Hume argues that we should not believe miracles have occurred and that they do not therefore provide us with any reason to think God exists.{{sfn|Bailey|O'Brien|2006|p=101}} In ''An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding'' (Section 10), Hume defines a miracle as "a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the Deity, or by the interposition of some invisible agent". Hume says we believe an event that has frequently occurred is likely to occur again, but we also take into account those instances where the event did not occur. Hume wrote:
In his discussion of [[miracle]]s, Hume argues that we should not believe miracles have occurred and that they do not therefore provide us with any reason to think God exists.{{sfn|Bailey|O'Brien|2006|p=101}} In ''An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding'' (Section 10), Hume defines a miracle as "a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the Deity, or by the interposition of some invisible agent". Hume says we believe an event that has frequently occurred is likely to occur again, but we also take into account those instances where the event did not occur:{{sfn|Hume|1777|pp=110–111}}


<blockquote>A wise man [...] considers which side is supported by the greater number of experiments [...] A hundred instances or experiments on one side, and fifty on another, afford a doubtful expectation of any event; though a hundred uniform experiments, with only one that is contradictory, reasonably beget a pretty strong degree of assurance. In all cases, we must balance the opposite experiments [...] and deduct the smaller number from the greater, in order to know the exact force of the superior evidence.{{sfn|Hume|1777|pp=110–111}}</blockquote>
<blockquote>A wise man ... considers which side is supported by the greater number of experiments. ... A hundred instances or experiments on one side, and fifty on another, afford a doubtful expectation of any event; though a hundred uniform experiments, with only one that is contradictory, reasonably beget a pretty strong degree of assurance. In all cases, we must balance the opposite experiments ... and deduct the smaller number from the greater, in order to know the exact force of the superior evidence.</blockquote>


Hume discusses the testimony of those who report miracles. He wrote that testimony might be doubted even from some great authority in case the facts themselves are not credible. "[T]he evidence, resulting from the testimony, admits of a diminution, greater or less, in proportion as the fact is more or less unusual."{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=113}}
Hume discusses the testimony of those who report miracles. He wrote that testimony might be doubted even from some great authority in case the facts themselves are not credible: "[T]he evidence, resulting from the testimony, admits of a diminution, greater or less, in proportion as the fact is more or less unusual."{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=113}}


Although Hume leaves open the possibility for miracles to occur and be reported, he offers various arguments against this ever having happened in history.{{sfn|Hume|1777|pp=116–131|ps=, Part II of Section X}} He points out that people often lie, and they have good reasons to lie about miracles occurring either because they believe they are doing so for the benefit of their religion or because of the fame that results. Furthermore, people by nature enjoy relating miracles they have heard without caring for their veracity and thus miracles are easily transmitted even when false. Also, Hume notes that miracles seem to occur mostly in "ignorant and barbarous nations"{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=119}} and times, and the reason they do not occur in the civilised societies is such societies are not awed by what they know to be natural events. Finally, the miracles of each religion argue against all other religions and their miracles, and so even if a proportion of all reported miracles across the world fit Hume's requirement for belief, the miracles of each religion make the other less likely.{{sfn|Bailey|O'Brien|2006|pp=105–108}}
Although Hume leaves open the possibility for miracles to occur and be reported, he offers various arguments against this ever having happened in history.{{sfn|Hume|1777|pp=116–131|ps=, Part II of Section X}} He points out that people often lie, and they have good reasons to lie about miracles occurring either because they believe they are doing so for the benefit of their religion or because of the fame that results. Furthermore, people by nature enjoy relating miracles they have heard without caring for their veracity and thus miracles are easily transmitted even when false. Also, Hume notes that miracles seem to occur mostly in "ignorant and barbarous nations"{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=119}} and times, and the reason they do not occur in the civilised societies is such societies are not awed by what they know to be natural events. Hume recognizes that over a long period of time, various coincidences can provide the appearance of intention. Finally, the miracles of each religion argue against all other religions and their miracles, and so even if a proportion of all reported miracles across the world fit Hume's requirement for belief, the miracles of each religion make the other less likely.{{sfn|Bailey|O'Brien|2006|pp=105–108}}


Hume was extremely pleased with his argument against miracles in his ''Enquiry''. He states "I flatter myself, that I have discovered an argument of a like nature, which, if just, will, with the wise and learned, be an everlasting check to all kinds of superstitious delusion, and consequently, will be useful as long as the world endures."{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=110}} Thus, Hume's argument against miracles had a more abstract basis founded upon the scrutiny, not just primarily of miracles, but of all forms of belief systems. It is a common sense notion of veracity based upon epistemological evidence, and founded on a principle of rationality, proportionality and reasonability.{{sfn|Bailey|O'Brien|2006|pp=105–108}}
Hume was extremely pleased with his argument against miracles in his ''Enquiry''. He states, "I flatter myself, that I have discovered an argument of a like nature, which, if just, will, with the wise and learned, be an everlasting check to all kinds of superstitious delusion, and consequently, will be useful as long as the world endures."{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=110}} Thus, Hume's argument against miracles had a more abstract basis founded upon the scrutiny, not just primarily of miracles, but of all forms of belief systems. It is a commonsense notion of veracity based upon epistemological evidence, and founded on a principle of rationality, proportionality and reasonability.{{sfn|Bailey|O'Brien|2006|pp=105–108}}


The criterion for assessing a belief system for Hume is based on the balance of probability whether something is more likely than not to have occurred. Since the weight of empirical experience contradicts the notion for the existence of miracles, such accounts should be treated with scepticism. Further, the myriad of accounts of miracles contradict one another, as some people who receive miracles will aim to prove the authority of Jesus, whereas others will aim to prove the authority of Muhammad or some other religious prophet or deity. These various differing accounts weaken the overall evidential power of miracles.{{sfn| Ahluwalia|2008|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=-PCV11VQ8PYC&pg=PA104&dq=%22Understanding+Philosophy+of+Religion%22+hume&hl=en&sa=X&ei=6qs4Vbe4EofXPeywgbgN&ved=0CCEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22Understanding%20Philosophy%20of%20Religion%22%20hume&f=false pp.104–106]}}{{failed verification|date=April 2015}}
The criterion for assessing Hume's belief system is based on the balance of probability whether something is more likely than not to have occurred. Since the weight of empirical experience contradicts the notion for the existence of miracles, such accounts should be treated with scepticism. Further, the myriad of accounts of miracles contradict one another, as some people who receive miracles will aim to prove the authority of Jesus, whereas others will aim to prove the authority of Muhammad or some other religious prophet or deity. These various differing accounts weaken the overall evidential power of miracles.{{sfn|Ahluwalia|2008|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=-PCV11VQ8PYC&dq=%22Understanding+Philosophy+of+Religion%22+hume&pg=PA104 pp. 104–106]}}{{failed verification|date=April 2015}}


Despite all this, Hume observes that belief in miracles is popular, and that "The gazing populace [...] receive greedily, without examination, whatever soothes superstition, and promotes wonder."{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=126}}
Despite all this, Hume observes that belief in miracles is popular, and that "the gazing populace… receive greedily, without examination, whatever soothes superstition, and promotes wonder."{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=126}}


Critics have argued that Hume's position assumes the character of miracles and [[natural law]]s prior to any specific examination of miracle claims, thus it amounts to a subtle form of [[begging the question]]. To assume that testimony is a homogeneous reference group seems unwise- to compare private miracles with public miracles, unintellectual observers with intellectual observers and those who have little to gain and much to lose with those with much to gain and little to lose is not convincing to many. Indeed, many have argued that miracles not only do not contradict the laws of nature, but require the laws of nature to be intelligible as miraculous, and thus subverting the law of nature. For example, William Adams remarks that "there must be an ordinary course of nature before anything can be extraordinary. There must be a stream before anything can be interrupted".<ref>{{cite book|url=https://archive.org/stream/essayinanswertom00adamiala#page/14/mode/2up |title=An essay in answer to Mr. Hume's Essay on miracles |accessdate=16 March 2017|publisher=London : White |year=1767 }}</ref> They have also noted that it requires an appeal to inductive inference, as none have observed every part of nature nor examined every possible miracle claim, for instance those in the future. This, in Hume's philosophy, was especially problematic.{{sfn|Levine|1989|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=fC3-d89f7qoC&dq=hume+miracle+criticism&q=%22hume+with+a+glaring%22#v=snippet&q=%22hume%20with%20a%20glaring%22&f=false p. 3]}}
Critics have argued that Hume's position assumes the character of miracles and [[natural law]]s prior to any specific examination of miracle claims, thus it amounts to a subtle form of [[begging the question]]. To assume that testimony is a homogeneous reference group seems unwise- to compare private miracles with public miracles, unintellectual observers with intellectual observers and those who have little to gain and much to lose with those with much to gain and little to lose is not convincing to many. Indeed, many have argued that miracles not only do not contradict the laws of nature but require the laws of nature to be intelligible as miraculous, and thus subverting the law of nature. For example, William Adams remarks that "there must be an ordinary course of nature before anything can be extraordinary. There must be a stream before anything can be interrupted."<ref>{{cite book|url=https://archive.org/stream/essayinanswertom00adamiala#page/14/mode/2up |title=An essay in answer to Mr. Hume's Essay on miracles |access-date=16 March 2017|publisher=London : White |year=1767 }}</ref> They have also noted that it requires an appeal to inductive inference, as none have observed every part of nature nor examined every possible miracle claim, for instance those in the future. This, in Hume's philosophy, was especially problematic.{{sfn|Levine|1989|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=fC3-d89f7qoC&q=%22hume+with+a+glaring%22 p. 3]}}


Little appreciated is the voluminous literature either foreshadowing Hume, in the likes of Thomas Sherlock<ref>{{cite book|url=https://archive.org/details/trialwitnessesr00shergoog |quote=witnesses Thomas SHerlock. |title=The Trial of the Witnesses of the Resurrection of Jesus - Internet Archive |publisher=John Eliot |accessdate=16 March 2017|last1=Sherlock |first1=Thomas |year=1809 }}</ref> or directly responding to and engaging with Hume- from William Paley,<ref>{{cite web|url=https://books.google.com/?id=vqcRAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=Nairne+intitle:Evidences+inauthor:William+inauthor:Paley#v=onepage&q&f=false |title=Paley's Evidences of Christianity: With Notes and Additions - William Paley, Charles Murray Nairne - Google Books |accessdate=16 March 2017|last1=Paley |first1=William |last2=Nairne |first2=Charles Murray |year=1858 }}</ref> William Adams,<ref>{{cite book|url=https://archive.org/details/essayinanswertom00adamiala |title=An essay in answer to Mr. Hume's Essay on miracles : Adams, William, 1706-1789 : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive |accessdate=16 March 2017|publisher=London : White |year=1767 }}</ref> John Douglas,<ref>{{cite web|url=https://books.google.com/?id=Y4UNAAAAQAAJ&pg=PR1&lpg=PR1&dq=douglas+the+criterion+miracles#v=onepage&q=douglas%20the%20criterion%20miracles&f=false |title=The criterion: or, Miracles examined with a view to expose the pretensions ... - John Douglas, John Douglas (bp. of Salisbury.) - Google Books |accessdate=16 March 2017|last1=Douglas |first1=John |last2=) |first2=John Douglas (bp. of Salisbury |year=1832 }}</ref> John Leland<ref>{{cite web|url=https://books.google.com/?id=Rt9JAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=intitle:View+intitle:Principal+intitle:Deistical+inauthor:Leland#v=onepage&q&f=false |title=A view of the principal deistical writers that have appeared in England in ... - John Leland, William Laurence Brown - Google Books |accessdate=16 March 2017|last1=Leland |first1=John |last2=Brown |first2=William Laurence |year=1837 }}</ref> and [[George Campbell (minister)|George Campbell]],<ref>{{cite web|url=https://books.google.com/?id=ddsOAAAAIAAJ |title=A Dissertation on Miracles: Containing an Examination of the Principles ... - George Campbell - Google Books |accessdate=16 March 2017|last1=Campbell |first1=George |year=1823 }}</ref> among others. Of Campbell, it is rumoured that, having read Campbell's Dissertation, Hume remarked that "the Scotch theologue had beaten him".<ref>{{cite web|author=George Campbell |url=http://historicalapologetics.org/campbell-george/ |title=Campbell, George « Library of Historical Apologetics |publisher=Historicalapologetics.org |accessdate=16 March 2017|date=2016-12-25 }}</ref>
Little appreciated is the voluminous literature either foreshadowing Hume, in the likes of [[Thomas Sherlock]]<ref>{{cite book|url=https://archive.org/details/trialwitnessesr00shergoog |quote=witnesses Thomas SHerlock. |title=The Trial of the Witnesses of the Resurrection of Jesus Internet Archive |publisher=John Eliot |access-date=16 March 2017|last1=Sherlock |first1=Thomas |year=1809 }}</ref> or directly responding to and engaging with Hume—from [[William Paley]],<ref>{{cite web|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=vqcRAAAAYAAJ&q=Nairne+intitle:Evidences+inauthor:William+inauthor:Paley |title=Paley's Evidences of Christianity: With Notes and Additions William Paley, Charles Murray Nairne| via= Google Books |access-date=16 March 2017|last1=Paley |first1=William |last2=Nairne |first2=Charles Murray |year=1858 }}</ref> William Adams,<ref>{{cite book|url=https://archive.org/details/essayinanswertom00adamiala |title=An essay in answer to Mr. Hume's Essay on miracles : Adams, William, 1706–1789 |access-date=16 March 2017|publisher=London : White |year=1767 }}</ref> John Douglas,<ref>{{cite web|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Y4UNAAAAQAAJ&q=douglas+the+criterion+miracles&pg=PR1 |title=The criterion: or, Miracles examined with a view to expose the pretensions ... John Douglas, John Douglas (bp. of Salisbury.)| via= Google Books |access-date=16 March 2017|last1=Douglas |first1=John |year=1832 }}</ref> [[John Leland (Baptist)|John Leland]],<ref>{{cite web|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Rt9JAAAAMAAJ&q=intitle:View+intitle:Principal+intitle:Deistical+inauthor:Leland |title=A view of the principal deistical writers that have appeared in England in ... John Leland, William Laurence Brown| via= Google Books |access-date=16 March 2017|last1=Leland |first1=John |last2=Brown |first2=William Laurence |year=1837 }}</ref> and [[George Campbell (minister)|George Campbell]],<ref>{{cite web|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ddsOAAAAIAAJ |title=A Dissertation on Miracles: Containing an Examination of the Principles ... George Campbell| via= Google Books |access-date=16 March 2017|last1=Campbell |first1=George |year=1823 }}</ref> among others. Regarding the latter, it is rumoured that, having read Campbell's Dissertation, Hume remarked that "the Scotch theologue had beaten him."<ref>{{cite web|title=Campbell, George|url=http://historicalapologetics.org/campbell-george/|author=Huitt, Kyle|date=25 December 2016|website=Library of Historical Apologetics|access-date=16 May 2020}}</ref>


Hume's main argument concerning miracles is that miracles by definition are singular events that differ from the established laws of nature. Such natural laws are codified as a result of past experiences. Therefore, a miracle is a violation of all prior experience and thus incapable on this basis of reasonable belief. However, the probability that something has occurred in contradiction of all past experience should always be judged to be less than the probability that either ones senses have deceived one, or the person recounting the miraculous occurrence is lying or mistaken. Hume would say, all of which he had past experience of. For Hume, this refusal to grant credence does not guarantee correctness. He offers the example of an Indian Prince, who, having grown up in a hot country, refuses to believe that water has frozen. By Hume's lights, this refusal is not wrong and the Prince "reasoned justly"; it is presumably only when he has had extensive experience of the freezing of water that he has warrant to believe that the event could occur.{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=113}}
Hume's main argument concerning miracles is that miracles by definition are singular events that differ from the established laws of nature. Such natural laws are codified as a result of past experiences. Therefore, a miracle is a violation of all prior experience and thus incapable on this basis of reasonable belief. However, the probability that something has occurred in contradiction of all past experience should always be judged to be less than the probability that either one's senses have deceived one, or the person recounting the miraculous occurrence is lying or mistaken, Hume would say, all of which he had past experience of. For Hume, this refusal to grant credence does not guarantee correctness. He offers the example of an Indian Prince, who, having grown up in a hot country, refuses to believe that water has frozen. By Hume's lights, this refusal is not wrong and the prince "reasoned justly;" it is presumably only when he has had extensive experience of the freezing of water that he has warrant to believe that the event could occur.{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=113}}


So for Hume, either the miraculous event will become a recurrent event or else it will never be rational to believe it occurred. The connection to religious belief is left unexplained throughout, except for the close of his discussion where Hume notes the reliance of Christianity upon testimony of miraculous occurrences. He makes an ironic remark that anyone who "is moved by faith to assent" to revealed testimony "is conscious of a continued miracle in his own person, which subverts all principles of his understanding, and gives him a determination to believe what is most contrary to custom and experience."{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=131|ps=, emphasis removed}}{{sfn|MacKie|1982|p=29}} Hume writes that "All the testimony which ever was really given for any miracle, or ever will be given, is a subject of derision."{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=113}}
So, for Hume, either the miraculous event will become a recurrent event or else it will never be rational to believe it occurred. The connection to religious belief is left unexplained throughout, except for the close of his discussion where Hume notes the reliance of Christianity upon testimony of miraculous occurrences. He makes an ironic remark that anyone who "is moved by faith to assent" to revealed testimony "is conscious of a continued miracle in his own person, which subverts all principles of his understanding, and gives him a determination to believe what is most contrary to custom and experience."{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=131|ps=, emphasis removed}}{{sfn|MacKie|1982|p=29}} Hume writes that "All the testimony whichever was really given for any miracle, or ever will be given, is a subject of derision."{{sfn|Hume|1777|p=113}}


===As historian of England===
=== As a historian of England ===
[[File:David Hume 2.jpg|thumb| David Hume by [[Allan Ramsay (artist)|Allan Ramsay]], 1766]]
[[File:David Hume Ramsay.jpg|thumb| David Hume by [[Allan Ramsay (artist)|Allan Ramsay]], 1766; "Where men are the most sure and arrogant, they are commonly the most mistaken, and have there given reins to passion, without that proper deliberation and suspense, which can alone secure them from the grossest absurdities."
—''[[w:An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals|An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals]]'', § 9.13 : Conclusion, Pt. 1 (1751)]]
From 1754 to 1762 Hume published ''The History of England'', a 6-volume work, which extends, says its subtitle, "From the Invasion of Julius Caesar to the Revolution in 1688". Inspired by [[Voltaire]]'s sense of the breadth of history, Hume widened the focus of the field away from merely kings, parliaments, and armies, to literature and science as well. He argued that the quest for liberty was the highest standard for judging the past, and concluded that after considerable fluctuation, England at the time of his writing had achieved "the most entire system of liberty that was ever known amongst mankind".<ref>Hume's History of England, vol, 6, p. 531 cited in {{harvtxt|Kenyon|1984|p=42}}</ref> It "must be regarded as an event of cultural importance. In its own day, moreover, it was an innovation, soaring high above its very few predecessors."{{sfn|Jessop|2015}} Hume's ''History of England'' made him famous as a historian before he was ever considered a serious philosopher. In this work, Hume uses history to tell the story of the rise of England and what led to its greatness and the disastrous effects that religion has had on its progress. For Hume, the history of England's rise may give a template for others who would also like to rise to its current greatness.<ref name=":0" />
From 1754 to 1762 Hume published ''[[The History of England (Hume)|The History of England]]'', a six-volume work, that extends (according to its subtitle) "From the [[Julius Caesar's invasions of Britain|Invasion of Julius Caesar]] to the [[Glorious Revolution|Revolution in 1688]]." Inspired by [[Voltaire]]'s sense of the breadth of history, Hume widened the focus of the field away from merely kings, parliaments, and armies, to literature and science as well. He argued that the quest for liberty was the highest standard for judging the past, and concluded that after considerable fluctuation, England at the time of his writing had achieved "the most entire system of liberty that was ever known amongst mankind".<ref>Hume's History of England, vol, 6, p. 531 cited in {{harvtxt|Kenyon|1984|p=42}}</ref> It "must be regarded as an event of cultural importance. In its own day, moreover, it was an innovation, soaring high above its very few predecessors."{{sfn|Jessop|2015}} Hume's ''History of England'' made him famous as a historian before he was ever considered a serious philosopher. In this work, Hume uses history to tell the story of the rise of England and what led to its greatness and the disastrous effects that religion has had on its progress. For Hume, the history of England's rise may give a template for others who would also like to rise to its current greatness.<ref name=":0" />


Hume's ''The History of England'' was profoundly impacted by his Scottish background. The science of sociology, which is rooted in Scottish thinking of the eighteenth century, had never before been applied to British philosophical history. Because of his Scottish background, Hume was able to bring an outsider's lens to English history that the insulated English whigs lacked.<ref>{{Cite book|title=History and the Enlightenment|last=Trevor-Roper|first=Hugh|publisher=Yale University Press|year=2010|isbn=|location=|pages=122}}</ref>
Hume's ''The History of England'' was profoundly impacted by his Scottish background. The science of sociology, which is rooted in Scottish thinking of the eighteenth century, had never before been applied to British philosophical history. Because of his Scottish background, Hume was able to bring an outsider's lens to English history that the insulated English whigs lacked.<ref name=":7" />{{Rp|122}}


Hume's coverage of the political upheavals of the 17th century relied in large part on the [[Edward Hyde, 1st Earl of Clarendon|Earl of Clarendon]]'s ''History of the Rebellion and Civil Wars in England'' (1646–69). Generally, Hume took a moderate [[royalist]] position and considered revolution unnecessary to achieve necessary reform. Hume was considered a Tory historian, and emphasised religious differences more than constitutional issues. Laird Okie explains that "Hume preached the virtues of political moderation, but&nbsp;... it was moderation with an anti-Whig, pro-royalist coloring."{{sfn|Okie|1985|p=16}} For "Hume shared the&nbsp;... Tory belief that the [[House of Stuart|Stuarts]] were no more high-handed than their Tudor predecessors".{{sfn|Okie|1985|p=25}} "Even though Hume wrote with an anti-Whig animus, it is, paradoxically, correct to regard the ''History'' as an establishment work, one which implicitly endorsed the ruling oligarchy".{{sfn|Okie|1985|p=27}}
Hume's coverage of the political upheavals of the 17th century relied in large part on the [[Edward Hyde, 1st Earl of Clarendon|Earl of Clarendon]]'s ''History of the Rebellion and Civil Wars in England'' (1646–69). Generally, Hume took a moderate [[royalist]] position and considered revolution unnecessary to achieve necessary reform. Hume was considered a [[Tories (British political party)|Tory]] historian and emphasised religious differences more than constitutional issues. Laird Okie explains that "Hume preached the virtues of political moderation, but&nbsp;... it was moderation with an anti-Whig, pro-royalist coloring."{{sfn|Okie|1985|p=16}} For "Hume shared the&nbsp;... Tory belief that the [[House of Stuart|Stuarts]] were no more high-handed than their Tudor predecessors".{{sfn|Okie|1985|p=25}} "Even though Hume wrote with an anti-Whig animus, it is, paradoxically, correct to regard the ''History'' as an establishment work, one which implicitly endorsed the ruling oligarchy".{{sfn|Okie|1985|p=27}}
Historians have debated whether Hume posited a universal unchanging human nature, or allowed for evolution and development.{{sfn|Wertz|1975|p=?}}
Historians have debated whether Hume posited a universal unchanging human nature, or allowed for evolution and development.{{sfn|Wertz|1975|p=?}}


The debate between Tory and the Whig historians can be seen in the initial reception to Hume's ''History of England''. The whig-dominated world of 1754 overwhelmingly disapproved of Hume's take on English history. In later editions of the book, Hume worked to "soften or expunge many villainous whig strokes which had crept into it."<ref>{{Cite book|title=History and the Enlightenment|last=Trevor-Roper|first=Hugh|publisher=Yale University Press|year=2010|isbn=|location=|pages=121}}</ref>
The debate between Tory and the Whig historians can be seen in the initial reception to Hume's ''History of England''. The whig-dominated world of 1754 overwhelmingly disapproved of Hume's take on English history. In later editions of the book, Hume worked to "soften or expunge many villainous whig strokes which had crept into it."<ref name=":7" />{{Rp|121}}


Hume did not consider himself a pure Tory. Before 1745, he was more akin to an "independent whig." In 1748, he described himself as "a whig, though a very skeptical one." This description of himself as in between whiggism and toryism, helps one understand that his ''History of England'' should be read as his attempt to work out his own philosophy of history.<ref>{{Cite book|title=History and the Enlightenment|last=Trevor-Roper|first=Hugh|year=2010|isbn=|location=|pages=122}}</ref>
Hume did not consider himself a pure Tory. Before 1745, he was more akin to an "independent whig." In 1748, he described himself as "a whig, though a very skeptical one." This description of himself as in between [[whiggism]] and [[toryism]], helps one understand that his ''History of England'' should be read as his attempt to work out his own philosophy of history.<ref name=":7" />{{Rp|122}}


Robert Roth argues that Hume's histories display his biases against [[Presbyterianism|Presbyterian]]s and [[Puritan]]s. Roth says his anti-Whig pro-monarchy position diminished the influence of his work, and that his emphasis on politics and religion led to a neglect of social and economic history.{{sfn|Roth|1991|p=?}}
Robert Roth argues that Hume's histories display his biases against [[Presbyterianism|Presbyterian]]s and [[Puritan]]s. Roth says his anti-Whig pro-monarchy position diminished the influence of his work, and that his emphasis on politics and religion led to a neglect of social and economic history.{{sfn|Roth|1991|p=?}}


Hume was an early cultural [[history of science|historian of science]]. His short biographies of leading scientists explored the process of scientific change. He developed new ways of seeing scientists in the context of their times by looking at how they interacted with society and each other. He covers over forty scientists, with special attention paid to [[Francis Bacon]], [[Robert Boyle]], and [[Isaac Newton]]. Hume particularly praised [[William Harvey]], writing about his treatise of the circulation of the blood: "Harvey is entitled to the glory of having made, by reasoning alone, without any mixture of accident, a capital discovery in one of the most important branches of science".{{sfn|Wertz|1993|p=?}}
Hume was an early cultural [[history of science|historian of science]]. His short biographies of leading scientists explored the process of scientific change. He developed new ways of seeing scientists in the context of their times by looking at how they interacted with society and each other. He covers over forty scientists, with special attention paid to [[Francis Bacon]], [[Robert Boyle]], and [[Isaac Newton]]. Hume particularly praised [[William Harvey]], writing about his treatise of the circulation of the blood: "Harvey is entitled to the glory of having made, by reasoning alone, without any mixture of accident, a capital discovery in one of the most important branches of science."{{sfn|Wertz|1993|p=?}}


The ''History'' became a best-seller and made Hume a wealthy man who no longer had to take up salaried work for others.{{sfn|Morris|Brown|2011|loc=[http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2011/entries/hume/#LifWor Chapter Life and Works]}} It was influential for nearly a century, despite competition from imitations by [[Tobias Smollett|Smollett]] (1757), [[Oliver Goldsmith|Goldsmith]] (1771) and others. By 1894, there were at least 50 editions as well as abridgements for students, and illustrated pocket editions, probably produced specifically for women.{{sfn|Phillipson|2012|p=131}}
The ''History'' became a best-seller and made Hume a wealthy man who no longer had to take up salaried work for others.{{sfn|Morris|Brown|2011|loc=[http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2011/entries/hume/#LifWor Chapter Life and Works]}} It was influential for nearly a century, despite competition from imitations by [[Tobias Smollett|Smollett]] (1757), [[Oliver Goldsmith|Goldsmith]] (1771) and others. By 1894, there were at least 50 editions as well as abridgements for students, and illustrated pocket editions, probably produced specifically for women.{{sfn|Phillipson|2012|p=131}}


===Political theory===
=== Political theory ===
{{Utilitarianism}}{{Conservatism UK}}
{{Liberalism sidebar}}
Many of Hume's political ideas, such as [[limited government]], [[private property]] when there is [[scarcity]], and [[constitutionalism]], are first principles of [[liberalism]].<ref>[https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2020/12/17/david-humes-classical-liberalism/ David Hume's Classical Liberalism], Thomas W. Merrill</ref> [[Thomas Jefferson]] banned the ''History'' from [[University of Virginia]], feeling that it had "spread universal toryism over the land."<ref>So quoted in {{harvtxt|Livingston|1965}}</ref> By comparison, [[Samuel Johnson]] thought Hume to be "a Tory by chance [...] for he has no principle. If he is anything, he is a [[Hobbism|Hobbist]]."{{sfn|Hume|1888|loc=note 13 to letter LXXXIV}} A major concern of Hume's political philosophy is the importance of the rule of law. He also stresses throughout his political essays the importance of moderation in politics, public spirit, and regard to the community.{{sfn|Forbes|1985|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=PX86AAAAIAAJ&q=politics+moderation+hume+detested p. 150]}}
{{Utilitarianism}}
It is difficult to categorise Hume's political affiliations using modern terminology without being anachronistic. His writings might be described both as conservative and liberal.{{sfn|Dees|2010|p=403}} [[Thomas Jefferson]] banned the ''History'' from [[University of Virginia]], feeling that it had "spread universal toryism over the land".<ref>so quoted in {{harvtxt|Livingston|1965}}</ref> By comparison, [[Samuel Johnson]] thought Hume "a Tory by chance&nbsp;... for he has no principle. If he is anything, he is a Hobbist", a follower of [[Thomas Hobbes]].{{sfn|Hume|1888|loc=note 13 to letter LXXXIV}} A major concern of Hume's political philosophy is the importance of the rule of law. He also stresses throughout his political essays the importance of moderation in politics: public spirit and regard to the community.{{sfn|Forbes|1985|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=PX86AAAAIAAJ&dq=politics+moderation+hume&q=politics+moderation+hume+detested#v=snippet&q=politics%20moderation%20hume%20detested&f=false p. 150]}}


Throughout the period of the American Revolution, Hume had varying views. For instance, in 1768 he encouraged total revolt on the part of the Americans. In 1775, he became certain that a revolution would take place and said that he believed in the American principle and wished the British government would let them be. Hume's influence on some of the Founders can be seen in [[Benjamin Franklin]]'s suggestion at the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 that no high office in any branch of government should receive a salary, which is a suggestion Hume had made in his emendation of James Harrington's ''[[The Commonwealth of Oceana|Oceana]]''.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Werner|first=John|date=1972|title=David Hume and America|url=|journal=Journal of the History of Ideas|volume=33|issue=3|pages=439–456|doi=10.2307/2709045|jstor=2709045}}</ref>
Throughout the period of the American Revolution, Hume had varying views. For instance, in 1768 he encouraged total revolt on the part of the Americans. In 1775, he became certain that a revolution would take place and said that he believed in the American principle and wished the British government would let them be. Hume's influence on some of the Founders can be seen in [[Benjamin Franklin]]'s suggestion at the [[Constitutional Convention (United States)|Philadelphia Convention of 1787]] that no high office in any branch of government should receive a salary, which is a suggestion Hume had made in his emendation of [[James Harrington (author)|James Harrington]]'s ''[[The Commonwealth of Oceana|Oceana]]''.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Werner|first=John|year=1972|title=David Hume and America|journal=Journal of the History of Ideas|volume=33|issue=3|pages=439–456|doi=10.2307/2709045|jstor=2709045}}</ref>


The legacy of religious civil war in 18th-century Scotland, combined with the relatively recent memory of the 1715 and 1745 Jacobite risings, had fostered in Hume a distaste for enthusiasm and factionalism. These appeared to him to threaten the fragile and nascent political and social stability of a country that was deeply politically and religiously divided.{{sfn|Wiley|2012|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=Q94tuawjdYUC&pg=PA211&dq=hume+enthusiasm&hl=en&sa=X&ei=r6vjU73yDKbD7AaP54GYAQ&ved=0CDwQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=hume%20enthusiasm&f=false p. 211]}}{{failed verification|date=August 2015}} Hume thought that society is best governed by a general and impartial system of laws; he is less concerned about the form of government that administers these laws, so long as it does so fairly. However, he does write that a republic must produce laws, while "monarchy, when absolute, contains even something repugnant to law."{{sfn|Hume|1741|p=119}}
The legacy of religious civil war in 18th-century Scotland, combined with the relatively recent memory of the 1715 and 1745 Jacobite risings, had fostered in Hume a distaste for enthusiasm and factionalism. These appeared to him to threaten the fragile and nascent political and social stability of a country that was deeply politically and religiously divided.{{sfn|Wiley|2012|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=Q94tuawjdYUC&dq=hume+enthusiasm&pg=PA211 p. 211]}}{{failed verification|date=August 2015}} Hume thought that society is best governed by a general and impartial system of laws; he is less concerned about the form of government that administers these laws, so long as it does so fairly. However, he also clarified that a republic must produce laws, while "monarchy, when absolute, contains even something repugnant to law."{{sfn|Hume|1741|p=119}}


Hume expressed suspicion of attempts to reform society in ways that departed from long-established custom, and he counselled peoples not to resist their governments except in cases of the most egregious tyranny.{{sfn|Hume|1739|p=550}} However, he resisted aligning himself with either of Britain's two political parties, the [[Whigs (British political party)|Whigs]] and the [[Tory|Tories]]. Hume wrote:
Hume expressed suspicion of attempts to reform society in ways that departed from long-established custom, and he counselled peoples not to resist their governments except in cases of the most egregious tyranny.{{sfn|Hume|1739|p=550}} However, he resisted aligning himself with either of Britain's two political parties, the [[Whigs (British political party)|Whigs]] and the [[Tories (British political party)|Tories]], explaining that "my views of ''things'' are more conformable to Whig principles; my representations of ''persons'' to Tory prejudices".<ref>So quoted in {{harvtxt|Mossner|1980|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=7HXJAqqNl4QC&q=whig p. 311]}}, original emphasis.</ref>


The scholar Jerry Z. Muller argues that Hume's political thoughts have characteristics that later became typical for [[Conservatism in the United States|American]] and [[Conservatism in the United Kingdom|British conservatism]], which contain more positive views of [[capitalism]] than [[conservatism]] does elsewhere.<ref name="Muller">{{cite book|editor=Jerry Z. Muller|title=Conservatism: An Anthology of Social and Political Thought from David Hume to the Present|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=9F7i5u4sOtgC&pg=PA25|year=1997|publisher=Princeton U.P.|pages=25–26|isbn=978-0-691-03711-0}}</ref> Canadian philosopher Neil McArthur writes that Hume believed that we should try to balance our demands for liberty with the need for strong authority, without sacrificing either. McArthur characterises Hume as a "precautionary conservative,"<ref name=":13">McArthur, Neil. 2007. ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=LLq-4rxR5ncC David Hume's Political Theory: Law, Commerce, and the Constitution of Government]''. Toronto: [[University of Toronto Press]]. {{ISBN|978-0-8020-9335-6}}.</ref>{{Rp|124}} whose actions would have been "determined by prudential concerns about the consequences of change, which often demand we ignore our own principles about what is ideal or even legitimate."<ref name=":13" />{{failed verification|date=October 2015}} Hume supported the [[freedom of the press|liberty of the press]], and was sympathetic to democracy, when suitably constrained. American historian [[Douglass Adair]] has argued that Hume was a major inspiration for [[James Madison]]'s writings, and the essay "[[Federalist No. 10]]" in particular.{{sfn|Adair|1957|p=?}}
<blockquote>My views of ''things'' are more conformable to Whig principles; my representations of ''persons'' to Tory prejudices.<ref>so quoted in {{harvtxt|Mossner|1980|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=7HXJAqqNl4QC&q=whig#v=snippet&q=whig&f=false p. 311]}}, original emphasis</ref></blockquote>


Hume offered his view on the best type of society in an essay titled "Idea of a Perfect Commonwealth", which lays out what he thought was the best form of government. He hoped that "in some future age, an opportunity might be afforded of reducing the theory to practice, either by a dissolution of some old government, or by the combination of men to form a new one, in some distant part of the world". He defended a strict [[separation of powers]], [[decentralization|decentralisation]], extending the [[Suffrage|franchise]] to anyone who held property of value and limiting the power of the clergy. The system of the [[military of Switzerland|Swiss militia]] was proposed as the best form of protection. Elections were to take place on an annual basis and representatives were to be unpaid.{{sfn|Hume|1987}} Political philosophers [[Leo Strauss]] and [[Joseph Cropsey]], writing of Hume's thoughts about "the wise statesman", note that he "will bear a reverence to what carries the marks of age." Also, if he wishes to improve a constitution, his innovations will take account of the "ancient fabric", in order not to disturb society.<ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=E7mScxst9UoC&q=%22limits+of+human+foresight%22 |title=Strauss, L. and Cropsey, J., ''History of Political Philosophy'' |publisher=University of Chicago Press |year=2012 |access-date=16 March 2017|isbn=978-0-226-92471-7 |last1=Strauss |first1=Leo |last2=Cropsey |first2=Joseph }}</ref>
Canadian philosopher Neil McArthur writes that Hume believed that we should try to balance our demands for liberty with the need for strong authority, without sacrificing either. McArthur characterises Hume as a "precautionary conservative",{{sfn|McArthur|2007|p=124}} whose actions would have been "determined by prudential concerns about the consequences of change, which often demand we ignore our own principles about what is ideal or even legitimate."{{sfn|McArthur|2007}}{{failed verification|date=October 2015}} Hume supported the [[freedom of the press|liberty of the press]], and was sympathetic to democracy, when suitably constrained. American historian [[Douglass Adair]] has argued that Hume was a major inspiration for [[James Madison]]'s writings, and the essay "[[Federalist No. 10]]" in particular.{{sfn|Adair|1957|p=?}}


In the political analysis of philosopher [[George Holland Sabine]], the scepticism of Hume extended to the doctrine of [[consent of the governed|government by consent]]. He notes that "allegiance is a habit enforced by education and consequently as much a part of human nature as any other motive."<ref>[[George Holland Sabine|Sabine, George H.]] 1973 [1937]. ''[[A History of Political Theory]]''. US: [[Dryden Press]]. p. 603.</ref>
Hume offered his view on the best type of society in an essay titled "Idea of a Perfect Commonwealth", which lays out what he thought was the best form of government. He hoped that, "in some future age, an opportunity might be afforded of reducing the theory to practice, either by a dissolution of some old government, or by the combination of men to form a new one, in some distant part of the world". He defended a strict [[separation of powers]], [[decentralization|decentralisation]], extending the [[Suffrage|franchise]] to anyone who held property of value and limiting the power of the clergy. The system of the [[military of Switzerland|Swiss militia]] was proposed as the best form of protection. Elections were to take place on an annual basis and representatives were to be unpaid.{{sfn|Hume|1987}} Political philosophers [[Leo Strauss]] and [[Joseph Cropsey]], writing of Hume's thoughts about "the wise statesman", note that he "will bear a reverence to what carries the marks of age". Also, if he wishes to improve a constitution, his innovations will take account of the "ancient fabric", in order not to disturb society.<ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=E7mScxst9UoC&dq=History+of+Political+Philosophy&q=%22limits+of+human+foresight%22#v=snippet&q=%22limits%20of%20human%20foresight%22&f=false |title=Strauss, L. and Cropsey, J., ''History of Political Philosophy'', University of Chicago Press, 2012, p. 556 |date=2012-06-15 |accessdate=16 March 2017|isbn=9780226924717 |last1=Strauss |first1=Leo |last2=Cropsey |first2=Joseph }}</ref>


In the 1770s, Hume was critical of British policies toward the American colonies and advocated for American independence. He wrote in 1771 that "our union with America…in the nature of things, cannot long subsist."<ref name=wsj11042017/>
In the political analysis of philosopher [[George Holland Sabine|George Sabine]], the scepticism of Hume extended to the doctrine of [[consent of the governed|government by consent]]. He notes that "allegiance is a habit enforced by education and consequently as much a part of human nature as any other motive."<ref>[[George Sabine|Sabine, GH.]], ''A History of Political Theory'', Dryden Press, 1973 (1937), p. 603.</ref>


=== Contributions to economic thought ===
In the 1770s, Hume was critical of British policies toward the American colonies and advocated for American independence. He wrote in 1771 that "our union with America... in the nature of things, cannot long subsist".<ref name=wsj11042017 />

===Contributions to economic thought===
[[File:David_Hume_and_Adam_Smith_statues,_Edinburgh.jpg|thumb|Statues of David Hume and [[Adam Smith]] by David Watson Stevenson on the [[Scottish National Portrait Gallery]] in Edinburgh]]
[[File:David_Hume_and_Adam_Smith_statues,_Edinburgh.jpg|thumb|Statues of David Hume and [[Adam Smith]] by David Watson Stevenson on the [[Scottish National Portrait Gallery]] in Edinburgh]]
Hume expressed his economic views in his ''Political Discourses'', which were incorporated in ''Essays and Treatises'' as Part II of ''Essays, Moral and Political''.<ref name="Encyclopedia Britannica">{{Cite news|url=https://www.britannica.com/biography/David-Hume#toc12268|title=David Hume {{!}} Scottish philosopher|encyclopedia=Encyclopedia Britannica|access-date=2017-11-20|language=en}}</ref> To what extent he was influenced by Adam Smith is difficult to stress, however both of them had similar principles supported from historical events.<ref name="Encyclopedia Britannica"/> At the same time Hume did not demonstrate concrete system of economic theory which could be observed in Smith's ''[[The Wealth of Nations|Wealth of Nations]]''. However, he introduced several new ideas around which the "classical economics" of the 18th century was built.<ref name="Encyclopedia Britannica"/> Through his discussions on politics, Hume developed many ideas that are prevalent in the field of economics. This includes ideas on [[private property]], inflation, and [[international trade|foreign trade]].<ref>Robbins, Lionel ''A History of Economic Thought: The LSE Lectures'' edited by Medema and Samuels. Ch 11 and 12</ref> Referring to his essay "[[Of the Balance of Trade]]", economist [[Paul Krugman]] has remarked that "David Hume created what I consider the first true economic model."<ref>{{cite web|last=Krugman|first=Paul|title=How We Know The Earth Is Old|url=https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com//2012/11/20/how-we-know-the-earth-is-old/|work=The New York Times|accessdate=21 November 2012|date=2012-11-20}}</ref>
Hume expressed his economic views in his ''Political Discourses'', which were incorporated in ''Essays and Treatises'' as Part II of ''Essays, Moral and Political''.<ref name=":1" /> To what extent he was influenced by Adam Smith is difficult to assess; however, both of them had similar principles supported from historical events.<ref name=":1" /> At the same time Hume did not demonstrate concrete system of economic theory which could be observed in Smith's ''[[The Wealth of Nations|Wealth of Nations]]''. However, he introduced several new ideas around which the "classical economics" of the 18th century was built.<ref name=":1" /> Through his discussions on politics, Hume developed many ideas that are prevalent in the field of economics. This includes ideas on [[private property]], inflation, and [[international trade|foreign trade]].<ref>Robbins, Lionel ''A History of Economic Thought: The LSE Lectures'' edited by Medema and Samuels. Ch 11 and 12</ref> Referring to his essay "[[Of the Balance of Trade]]", economist [[Paul Krugman]] (2012) has remarked that "David Hume created what I consider the first true economic model."<ref>{{cite web|last=Krugman|first=Paul|title=How We Know The Earth Is Old|url=https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com//2012/11/20/how-we-know-the-earth-is-old/|work=The New York Times|access-date=21 November 2012|date=20 November 2012}}</ref>


In contrast to Locke, Hume believes that private property is not a natural right. Hume argues it is justified, because resources are limited. Private property would be an unjustified, "idle ceremonial", if all goods were unlimited and available freely.<ref>Richards, H. [https://books.google.com/books?id=9Kw5vLbYq-4C&pg=PA322&dq=hume+idle+ceremonial&hl=en&sa=X&ei=plOMVOCrMozuaMjCgqgD&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=hume%20idle%20ceremonial&f=false ''Understanding the Global Economy''], Peace Education Books, 2004, p. 322.</ref> Hume also believed in an unequal distribution of property, because perfect equality would destroy the ideas of thrift and industry. Perfect equality would thus lead to impoverishment.<ref>Hume, David ''An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals'' (1751)</ref><ref>Stewart, JB., [https://books.google.com/books?id=MTYABAAAQBAJ&pg=PA164&dq=hume+private+property&hl=en&sa=X&ei=hlKMVLXeHtfwaLf1gagD&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=hume%20private%20property&f=false ''Opinion and Reform in Hume's Political Philosophy''], Princeton University Press, 2014, pp. 163–164.</ref>
In contrast to [[John Locke|Locke]], Hume believes that private property is not a natural right. Hume argues it is justified, because resources are limited. Private property would be an unjustified, "idle ceremonial," if all goods were unlimited and available freely.<ref>Richards, H. [https://books.google.com/books?id=9Kw5vLbYq-4C&dq=hume+idle+ceremonial&pg=PA322 ''Understanding the Global Economy''], Peace Education Books, 2004, p. 322.</ref> Hume also believed in an unequal distribution of property, because perfect equality would destroy the ideas of thrift and industry. Perfect equality would thus lead to impoverishment.<ref>Hume, David. 1751. ''[[An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals]]''.</ref><ref>Stewart, J. B. 2014. [https://books.google.com/books?id=MTYABAAAQBAJ&dq=hume+private+property&pg=PA164 ''Opinion and Reform in Hume's Political Philosophy'']. Princeton: [[Princeton University Press]]. pp. 163–164.</ref>


David Hume anticipated modern [[monetarism]]. First, Hume contributed to the quantity theory and interest rate theory. Hume has been credited with being the first to prove that, on an abstract level, there is no quantifiable amount of nominal money a country needs to thrive. He understood that there was a difference between nominal money and real money. Second, Hume has a theory of causation which fits in with the Chicago school "black box" approach. According to Hume, cause and effect are related only through correlation. Hume shared the belief with modern monetarists that changes in the money supply can affect consumption and investments. Lastly, Hume was a vocal advocate of the stability of the private sector. However, Hume also had some non-monetarist aspects to his economic philosophy. For example, he had a stated preference for rising prices and thought of government debt as a sort of substitute for actual money. He called government debt "a kind of paper credit." He also believed in heavy taxation because he thought it increases effort. As can be seen, Hume's economic approach resembles his other philosophies in that he does not choose one side indefinitely, but sees gray in the situation<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Mayer|first=Thomas|date=1980|title=David Hume and Monetarism|url=|journal=The Quarterly Journal of Economics|volume=95|issue=1|pages=89–101|doi=10.2307/1885350|jstor=1885350}}</ref>
David Hume anticipated modern [[monetarism]]. First, Hume contributed to the theory of [[Quantity theory of money|quantity]] and of interest rate. Hume has been credited with being the first to prove that, on an abstract level, there is no quantifiable amount of nominal money that a country needs to thrive. He understood that there was a difference between [[Real versus nominal value (economics)|''nominal'' and ''real'' money]].


Second, Hume has a theory of causation which fits in with the [[Chicago school of economics|Chicago-school]] "[[black box]]" approach. According to Hume, cause and effect are related only through correlation. Hume shared the belief with modern monetarists that changes in the supply of money can affect consumption and investment.
==Influence==
[[File:David Hume statue, Edinburgh.jpg|thumb|Statue on Edinburgh's [[Royal Mile]]]]
Due to Hume's vast influence on contemporary philosophy, a large number of approaches in contemporary philosophy and cognitive science are today called "Humean."<ref>Garrett, Don, ''Hume (The Routledge Philosophers)'', Routledge -Reprint edition, 2014, p. ? {{ISBN|978-0415283342}}</ref>


Lastly, Hume was a vocal advocate of a stable [[private sector]], though also having some non-monetarist aspects to his economic philosophy. Having a stated preference for rising prices, for instance, Hume considered [[government debt]] to be a sort of substitute for actual money, referring to such debt as "a kind of paper credit." He also believed in heavy [[tax]]ation, believing that it increases effort. Hume's economic approach evidently resembles his other philosophies, in that he does not choose one side indefinitely, but sees gray in the situation<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Mayer|first=Thomas|year=1980|title=David Hume and Monetarism|journal=The Quarterly Journal of Economics|volume=95|issue=1|pages=89–101|doi=10.2307/1885350|jstor=1885350}}</ref>
The writings of Scottish philosopher and contemporary of Hume, [[Thomas Reid]], were often criticisms of Hume's scepticism. Reid formulated his [[common sense]] philosophy in part as a reaction against Hume's views.<ref>''Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy'', [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/reid/#ComSenFirPri "Thomas Reid"].</ref>


== Legacy ==
Hume influenced and was influenced by the Christian philosopher [[Joseph Butler]]. Hume was impressed by Butler's way of thinking about religion, and Butler may well have been influenced by Hume's writings.<ref>Savage, R., [https://books.google.com/books?id=8zTVtbQQuKsC&pg=PA170&dq=butler+hume&hl=en&sa=X&ei=wkWLVNOLN4T6ULC9hPgJ&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=butler%20hume&f=false ''Philosophy and Religion in Enlightenment Britain: New Case Studies''], Oxford University Press, 2012, p. 170.</ref><ref name= plat>{{cite web|url=http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2008/entries/hume-religion/ |title=Hume on Religion |author=Paul Russel |date=17 May 2010 |encyclopedia=First published October 4, 2005 |publisher=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2008 Edition) |accessdate=18 September 2010}}</ref>
[[File:DavidHumeStatueEdinburgh.jpg|alt=|thumb|Hume's statue on Edinburgh's [[Royal Mile]], sculpted by [[Alexander Stoddart]]]]
Due to Hume's vast influence on contemporary philosophy, a large number of approaches in contemporary philosophy and [[cognitive science]] are today called "[[Humean]]."<ref name=":6">Garrett, Don. 2015. ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=AChWBQAAQBAJ Hume]'' (reprint ed.). London: Routledge. {{ISBN|978-0-415-28334-2}}.</ref>


The writings of [[Thomas Reid]], a Scottish philosopher and contemporary of Hume, were often critical of Hume's scepticism. Reid formulated his ''[[common sense]]'' philosophy, in part, as a reaction against Hume's views.<ref>Nichols, Ryan, and Gideon Yaffe. 2014 [2000]."[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/reid/ Thomas Reid]." ''[[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]''. Stanford: Metaphysics Research Lab.</ref>
Attention to Hume's philosophical works grew after the German philosopher [[Immanuel Kant]], in his ''[[Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics]]'' (1783), credited Hume with awakening him from his "dogmatic slumber".<ref>Kant, I., ''Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics'': 'Introduction'</ref>


Hume influenced, and was influenced by, the Christian philosopher [[Joseph Butler]]. Hume was impressed by Butler's way of thinking about religion, and Butler may well have been influenced by Hume's writings.<ref>Savage, R. 2012. [https://books.google.com/books?id=8zTVtbQQuKsC&dq=butler+hume&pg=PA170 ''Philosophy and Religion in Enlightenment Britain: New Case Studies'']. Oxford: [[Oxford University Press]]. p. 170.</ref><ref name="plat">{{cite web|title=Hume on Religion|url=http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2008/entries/hume-religion/|author=Russel, Paul|year=2010|website=[[The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]|orig-date=2005|access-date=19 May 2020|edition=Winter 2008}}</ref>
According to [[Arthur Schopenhauer|Schopenhauer]], "there is more to be learned from each page of David Hume than from the collected philosophical works of [[Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel|Hegel]], [[Johann Friedrich Herbart|Herbart]] and [[Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher|Schleiermacher]] taken together."<ref>Schopenhauer, A., [https://books.google.com/books?id=OHIJgObqoXoC&dq=Schopenhauer+World+as+Will+and+Representation+volume+2+hume&q=page+hume+together#v=snippet&q=page%20hume%20together&f=false ''The World as Will and Representation''], Vol. 2, Ch. 46, p. 582.</ref>


Attention to Hume's philosophical works grew after the German philosopher [[Immanuel Kant]], in his ''[[Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics]]'' (1783), credited Hume with awakening him from his "dogmatic slumber."<ref>[[Immanuel Kant|Kant, Immanuel]]. 1783. "'Introduction." In ''[[Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics]].''</ref>
[[A. J. Ayer]], while introducing his classic exposition of logical positivism in 1936, claimed: "The views which are put forward in this treatise derive from&nbsp;... doctrines&nbsp;... which are themselves the logical outcome of the empiricism of Berkeley and David Hume."<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=3M3ycPeuRNoC&dq=ayer+truth&q=%22The+views%22#v=snippet&q=%22The+views%22&f=false|title=Language, Truth and Logic|first=A. J.|last=Ayer|date=26 April 2001|publisher=Penguin Books Limited|accessdate=14 August 2019|via=Google Books|isbn=9780141911809}}</ref> [[Albert Einstein]], in 1915, wrote that he was inspired by Hume's positivism when formulating his theory of [[special relativity]].<ref>Einstein, A., in a letter of 14 December 1915, to Moritz Schlick (Papers, A, Vol. 8A, Doc.165)</ref>


According to [[Arthur Schopenhauer]], "there is more to be learned from each page of David Hume than from the collected philosophical works of [[Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel|Hegel]], [[Johann Friedrich Herbart|Herbart]] and [[Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher|Schleiermacher]] taken together."<ref>[[Arthur Schopenhauer|Schopenhauer, Arthur]]. [https://books.google.com/books?id=OHIJgObqoXoC&q=page+hume+together ''The World as Will and Representation''] 2. Ch. 46, p. 582.</ref>
Hume's problem of induction was also of fundamental importance to the philosophy of Karl Popper. In his autobiography, ''Unended Quest'', he wrote: "Knowledge&nbsp;... is ''objective''; and it is hypothetical or conjectural. This way of looking at the problem made it possible for me to reformulate Hume's ''problem of induction''". This insight resulted in Popper's major work ''[[The Logic of Scientific Discovery]]''.<ref>Popper, K., [https://books.google.com/books?id=YmoQBAAAQBAJ&dq=Hume+Unended+Quest&q=%22is+hypothetical+or+conjectural%22#v=snippet&q=%22is%20hypothetical%20or%20conjectural%22&f=false ''Unended Quest; An Intellectual Autobiography''], 1976, pp. 95–96, {{ISBN|0-415-28590-9}}</ref> Also, in his ''[[Conjectures and Refutations]]'', he wrote:


[[A. J. Ayer]], while introducing his classic exposition of logical positivism in 1936, claimed that his views were "the logical outcome of the empiricism of Berkeley and David Hume".<ref>{{Cite book|last=Ayer|first=A. J.|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=3M3ycPeuRNoC&q=%22The+views%22|title=Language, Truth and Logic|year= 2001|publisher=Penguin Books Limited|isbn=978-0-14-191180-9|access-date=14 August 2019}}</ref>
<blockquote>I approached the problem of induction through Hume. Hume, I felt, was perfectly right in pointing out that induction cannot be logically justified.<ref>Popper, K., [https://books.google.com/books?id=zXh9AwAAQBAJ&dq=popper+conjectures&q=%22approached+the+problem%22#v=snippet&q=%22approached%20the%20problem%22&f=false ''Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge''], Routledge, 2014, . 55.</ref>
</blockquote>


[[Albert Einstein]], in 1915, wrote that he was inspired by Hume's positivism when formulating his theory of [[special relativity]].<ref>[[Albert Einstein|Einstein, Albert]]. 1998 [1915]. "Letter to Moritz Schlick." ''The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein'' 8A, edited by R. Schulmann, A. J. Fox, and J. Illy. Princeton, NJ: [[Princeton University Press]]. p. 220.</ref><ref>Schwarzschild, Bertram, trans. 2004. "[https://physicstoday.scitation.org/doi/pdf/10.1063/1.2169428 Albert Einstein to Moritz Schlick]." ''[[Physics Today]]'' 58(12):17. {{doi|10.1063/1.2169428}}.</ref>
Hume's [[rationalism]] in religious subjects influenced, via German-Scottish theologian [[Johann Joachim Spalding]], the German [[neology]] school and [[rational theology]], and contributed to the transformation of German theology in the [[age of enlightenment]].<ref>Marianne Schröter: Transformationen des Theologiebegriffes in der Aufklärung. In: Evangelische Theologie an Staatlichen Universitäten. Konzepte und Konstellationen Evangelischer Theologie und Religionsforschung. ed. by Stefan Alkier and Hans-Günter Heimbrock. Göttingen 2011, 182–202</ref><ref>Hodge, C., [https://archive.org/details/systematictheol00hodggoog/page/n59 <!-- pg=43 quote=hume neology theology. --> ''Systematic theology''], 1873, p. 43.</ref> Hume pioneered a comparative history of religion,<ref name=folg/><ref>Penelhum, T., [https://books.google.com/books?id=42OvBQAAQBAJ&pg=PT182&dq=comparative+religion+hume&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Y2OMVIXwIYGVatTwgJgF&ved=0CE0Q6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=comparative%20religion%20hume&f=false ''God and Skepticism''], Springer Science & Business Media, 1983.</ref> tried to explain various rites and traditions as being based on deception<ref>[[:de:Friedrich Wilhelm Graf]]: [http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/buecher/rezensionen/sachbuch/von-david-hume-liess-er-sich-nicht-die-butter-vom-brot-nehmen-1134693.html Von David Hume ließ er sich nicht die Butter vom Brot nehmen – Ein Ausweis der aufgeklärten protestantischen Theologenelite ist wieder zugänglich: Johann Joachim Spalding in vorzüglicher Edition] (Spalding never let Hume get the better of him, about a new edition of a mainstake of the enlighted protestant theological elite), review of Graf of a new edition of Spaldings works, in [[Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung]] Feuilleton, print version Nr. 249 / Page 39, 27 October 2003</ref><ref>Whelan, FG., [https://books.google.com/books?id=2d4qgsSLZQgC&pg=PA163&dq=deception+religion+hume&hl=en&sa=X&ei=nmSMVOXNC83fatPAgNgD&ved=0CCIQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=deception%20religion%20hume&f=false ''Hume and Machiavelli: Political Realism and Liberal Thought''], Lexington Books, 2004, p. 163.</ref> and challenged various aspects of rational and [[natural theology]], such as the argument from design.<ref name=folg>[http://www.iwm.at/events/event/religionsgeschichte-als-religionskritik-david-hume-und-die-folgen/ Religionsgeschichte als Religionskritik? David Hume und die Folgen (regligious studies as criticism of religion? David Hume's heritage)] "Beyond Myth and Enlightenment" lecture of [[Hans Joas]], 14 November 2013 at the [[Institut für die Wissenschaften vom Menschen]] thinktank in Vienna</ref>


Hume's problem of induction was also of fundamental importance to the philosophy of [[Karl Popper]]. In his autobiography, ''Unended Quest'', he wrote: "Knowledge&nbsp;... is ''objective''; and it is hypothetical or conjectural. This way of looking at the problem made it possible for me to reformulate Hume's ''problem of induction''." This insight resulted in Popper's major work ''[[The Logic of Scientific Discovery]]''.<ref>[[Karl Popper|Popper, Karl]]. 1976. [https://books.google.com/books?id=YmoQBAAAQBAJ&q=%22is+hypothetical+or+conjectural%22 ''Unended Quest; An Intellectual Autobiography'']. {{ISBN|978-0-415-28590-2}}. pp. 95–96.</ref> In his ''Conjectures and Refutations'', he wrote that he "approached the problem of induction through Hume", since Hume was "perfectly right in pointing out that induction cannot be logically justified".<ref>Popper, Karl. 2014 [1963]. [https://books.google.com/books?id=zXh9AwAAQBAJ&q=%22approached+the+problem%22 ''Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge'']. London: [[Routledge]]. p. 55.</ref>
Danish theologian and philosopher [[Søren Kierkegaard]] adopted "Hume's suggestion that the role of reason is not to make us wise but to reveal our ignorance." However, Kierkegaard took this as a reason for the necessity of religious faith, or [[fideism]]. The "fact that Christianity is contrary to reason ... is the necessary precondition for true faith." Political theorist [[Isaiah Berlin]], for example, has pointed out the similarities between the arguments of Hume and Kierkegaard against [[rational theology]].<ref name=kirk>Miles, T. [https://books.google.com/books?id=2Ii8i9Lc68oC&dq=hume+Kierkegaard+and+the+Renaissance&q=fideism+hume+studies#v=snippet&q=fideism%20hume%20studies&f=false "Hume: Kierkegaard and Hume on reason, faith, and the ethics of philosophy"], in Stewart, JB. ed., ''Kierkegaard and the Renaissance and Modern Traditions: Philosophy'', Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2009, p.27</ref> Berlin also writes about Hume's influence on what Berlin calls the [[counter-enlightenment]], and German anti-rationalism.<ref>Berlin, I., [https://books.google.com/books?id=RJqi_iMNRiAC&pg=PA204&dq=Hume+and+the+Sources+of+German+Anti-&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3VOLVKq-EMGR7Aaj74CgBA&ved=0CCIQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Hume%20and%20the%20Sources%20of%20German%20Anti-&f=false "Hume and the Sources of German Anti-Rationalism"], in '[[Against the Current: Essays in the History of Ideas]]', Princeton University Press, second edition, 2013, pp. 204–235.</ref>


Hume's [[rationalism]] in religious subjects influenced, via German-Scottish theologian [[Johann Joachim Spalding]], the German [[neology]] school and [[rational theology]], and contributed to the transformation of German theology in the [[Age of Enlightenment]].<ref>Hodge, Charles. 1873. [[iarchive:systematictheol00hodggoog/page/n59|''Systematic Theology'']]. New York: [[Charles Scribner's Sons|Scribner, Armstrong, and Co.]] p. 43. [[iarchive:systematictheol00hodggoog/page/n59|<!-- pg=43 quote=hume neology theology. -->]]</ref><ref>Schröter, Marianne. 2011. "Transformationen des Theologiebegriffes in der Aufklärung." pp. 182–202 in ''Evangelische Theologie an Staatlichen Universitäten:'' ''Konzepte und Konstellationen Evangelischer Theologie und Religionsforschung'', edited by S. Alkier and H. Heimbrock. Göttingen.</ref> Hume pioneered a comparative history of religion,<ref name=folg/><ref>Penelhum, T. 2012 [1983]. {{Cite book|title=Skepticism, Parity, and Religion: The Case of Hume|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=42OvBQAAQBAJ&pg=PT136|year= 2012|isbn = 978-94-009-7083-0|url-access=limited|last1 = Penelhum|first1 = T.| publisher=Springer }} pp. 120–145 in ''God and Skepticism: A Study in Skepticism and Fideism''. Dordrecht: [[D. Reidel Publishing Company|D. Reidel Publishing]].</ref> tried to explain various rites and traditions as being based on deception<ref>[[:de:Friedrich Wilhelm Graf]]: [https://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/buecher/rezensionen/sachbuch/von-david-hume-liess-er-sich-nicht-die-butter-vom-brot-nehmen-1134693.html Von David Hume ließ er sich nicht die Butter vom Brot nehmen – Ein Ausweis der aufgeklärten protestantischen Theologenelite ist wieder zugänglich: Johann Joachim Spalding in vorzüglicher Edition] (Spalding never let Hume get the better of him, about a new edition of a mainstake of the enlighted protestant theological elite), review of Graf of a new edition of Spaldings works, in [[Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung]] Feuilleton, print version Nr. 249 / Page 39, 27 October 2003</ref><ref>Whelan, FG., [https://books.google.com/books?id=2d4qgsSLZQgC&dq=deception+religion+hume&pg=PA163 ''Hume and Machiavelli: Political Realism and Liberal Thought''], Lexington Books, 2004, p. 163.</ref> and challenged various aspects of rational and [[natural theology]], such as the argument from design.<ref name="folg">[[Hans Joas|Joas, Hans]]. 14 November 2013. "{{Langx|de|[https://www.iwm.at/events/event/religionsgeschichte-als-religionskritik-david-hume-und-die-folgen/ Religionsgeschichte als Religionskritik? David Hume und die Folgen]|label=none|italic=no}}" (lecture). ''Beyond Myth and Enlightenment''. Vienna: [[Institut für die Wissenschaften vom Menschen]].
According to philosopher [[Jerry Fodor]], Hume's ''Treatise'' is "the founding document of [[cognitive science]]".<ref>{{cite journal|url=http://www.biographyonline.net/writers/philosophers/david-hume.html|title=David Hume Biography|volume=175|issue=4460|pages=697–698|journal=Biography Online|bibcode=1955Natur.175..697J|last1=Jessop|first1=T. E.|year=1955|doi=10.1038/175697a0}}</ref>


'''Title translation''': 'Religious Studies as Criticism of Religion? David Hume and the Consequences'</ref>
Hume engaged with contemporary intellectual luminaries such as [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau]], [[James Boswell]], and [[Adam Smith]] (who acknowledged Hume's influence on his economics and [[political philosophy]]).


Danish theologian and philosopher [[Søren Kierkegaard]] adopted "Hume's suggestion that the role of reason is not to make us wise but to reveal our ignorance," though taking it as a reason for the necessity of religious faith, or ''[[fideism]]''. The "fact that Christianity is contrary to reason…is the necessary precondition for true faith."<ref name="kirk" /> Political theorist [[Isaiah Berlin]], who has also pointed out the similarities between the arguments of Hume and Kierkegaard against [[rational theology]],<ref name="kirk">Miles, T. 2009. "[https://books.google.com/books?id=2Ii8i9Lc68oC&q=fideism+hume+studies Hume: Kierkegaard and Hume on reason, faith, and the ethics of philosophy]." In ''Kierkegaard and the Renaissance and Modern Traditions: Philosophy'', edited by J. B Stewart. London: [[Ashgate Publishing]]. p. 27.</ref> has written about Hume's influence on what Berlin calls the ''[[counter-Enlightenment]]'' and on German anti-rationalism.<ref>[[Isaiah Berlin|Berlin, Isaiah]]. 2013. "[https://books.google.com/books?id=RJqi_iMNRiAC&dq=Hume+and+the+Sources+of+German+Anti-&pg=PA204 Hume and the Sources of German Anti-Rationalism]." pp. 204–235 in ''[[Against the Current: Essays in the History of Ideas]]'' (2nd ed.). Princeton: [[Princeton University Press]].</ref> Berlin has also once said of Hume that "no man has influenced the history of philosophy to a deeper or more disturbing degree."<ref>[[Isaiah Berlin|Berlin, Isaiah]]. 11 May 2014. "[https://philosophynow.org/podcasts/Impressions_of_David_Hume Impressions of David Hume]" (podcast episode). ''[[Philosophy Now|Philosophy Now Radio Show]]'' 34, hosted by G. Bartley.</ref>
[[Isaiah Berlin]] once said of Hume that "No man has influenced the history of philosophy to a deeper or more disturbing degree."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://philosophynow.org/podcasts/Impressions_of_David_Hume|title=Impressions of David Hume - Podcasts - Philosophy Now|work=philosophynow.org}}</ref>


In 2003, philosopher [[Jerry Fodor]] described Hume's ''Treatise'' as "the founding document of [[cognitive science]]."<ref>{{cite journal|url=http://www.biographyonline.net/writers/philosophers/david-hume.html|title=David Hume Biography|volume=175|issue=4460|pages=697–698|journal=Biography Online|bibcode=1955Natur.175..697J|last1=Jessop|first1=T. E.|year=1955|doi=10.1038/175697a0|s2cid=4187913|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Fodor |first=Jerry A. |authorlink=Jerry Fodor |title=Hume Variations |location=New York |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |page=135}}</ref>
The ''Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy'' writes that Hume is "[g]enerally regarded as one of the most important philosophers to write in English."<ref>{{cite book|url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hume/|title=David Hume|encyclopedia=stanford.edu|publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University|year=2017}}</ref>


Hume engaged with contemporary intellectuals including [[Jean-Jacques Rousseau]], [[James Boswell]], and [[Adam Smith]] (who acknowledged Hume's influence on his economics and [[political philosophy]]).
==Family==
His nephew and namesake, [[David Hume (advocate)|David Hume of Ninewells]] (1757–1838), was a co-founder of the [[Royal Society of Edinburgh]] in 1783. He was a Professor of Scots Law at [[Edinburgh University]] and rose to be Principal Clerk Of Session in the Scottish High court and Baron of the Exchequer. He is buried with his uncle in Old Calton Cemetery.<ref>{{cite book|title=Biographical Index of Former Fellows of the Royal Society of Edinburgh 1783–2002|date=July 2006|publisher=The Royal Society of Edinburgh|isbn=0-902-198-84-X|url=https://www.royalsoced.org.uk/cms/files/fellows/biographical_index/fells_indexp1.pdf}}</ref>


Morris and Brown (2019) write that Hume is "generally regarded as one of the most important philosophers to write in English."<ref name="SEP" />
==Works==
* ''A Kind of History of My Life'' (1734) Mss 23159 [[National Library of Scotland]].<ref>David Fate Norton (ed.), ''The Cambridge Companion to Hume'', Cambridge University Press, 1993, pp. 345–350.</ref> A letter to an unnamed physician, asking for advice about "the Disease of the Learned" that then afflicted him. Here he reports that at the age of eighteen "there seem'd to be open'd up to me a new Scene of Thought" that made him "throw up every other Pleasure or Business" and turned him to scholarship.<ref>''The Cambridge Companion to Hume''. pp. 346.</ref>
* ''[[A Treatise of Human Nature]]: Being an Attempt to introduce the experimental Method of Reasoning into Moral Subjects'' (1739–40). Hume intended to see whether the [https://web.archive.org/web/20141215001902/https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/h/hume/david/h92t/ ''Treatise of Human Nature''] met with success, and if so to complete it with books devoted to Politics and Criticism. However, as Hume explained, "It fell ''dead-born from the press'', without reaching such distinction as even to excite a murmur among the zealots"{{sfn|Hume|1993|p=352}} and so his further project was not completed.
* ''An Abstract of a Book lately Published: Entitled A Treatise of Human Nature etc''. (1740) Anonymously published, but almost certainly written by Hume<ref>For this see the introduction by J. M. Keynes and P. Sraffa in: Hume, David (1965). ''An Abstract of A Treatise of Human Nature'' 1740. Connecticut: Archon Books</ref> in an attempt to popularise his ''Treatise''. Of considerable philosophical interest, because it spells out what he considered "The Chief Argument" of the ''Treatise'', in a way that seems to anticipate the structure of the ''Enquiry concerning Human Understanding''.
* ''[[Essays, Moral, Political, and Literary]]'' (first ed. 1741–2) A collection of pieces written and published over many years, though most were collected together in 1753–4. Many of the essays are on politics and economics; other topics include [[aesthetics|aesthetic judgement]], love, marriage and polygamy, and the demographics of ancient Greece and Rome. The Essays show some influence from [[Joseph Addison|Addison]]'s ''Tatler'' and ''[[The Spectator (1711)|The Spectator]]'', which Hume read avidly in his youth.
* ''A Letter from a Gentleman to His Friend in Edinburgh: Containing Some Observations on a Specimen of the Principles concerning Religion and Morality, said to be maintain'd in a Book lately publish'd, intituled A Treatise of Human Nature etc''. Edinburgh (1745). Contains a letter written by Hume to defend himself against charges of atheism and scepticism, while applying for a chair at Edinburgh University.
* ''[[An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding]]'' (1748) Contains reworking of the main points of the ''Treatise'', Book 1, with the addition of material on free will (adapted from Book 2), miracles, the Design Argument, and mitigated scepticism. ''[[Of Miracles]]'', section X of the ''Enquiry'', was often published separately.
* ''[[An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals]]'' (1751) A reworking of material on morality from Book 3 of the ''Treatise'', but with a significantly different emphasis. It "was thought by Hume to be the best of his writings".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://books.google.com/?id=PoI6AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA548&dq=david+hume++essay+concerning+morals+best+work#v=onepage&q=david%20hume%20%20essay%20concerning%20morals%20best%20work&f=false |title=Samson, G., ''The Concise Cambridge History of English Literature'', CUP Archive, 1941, p. 548 |accessdate=16 March 2017|last1=Sampson |first1=George |year=1943 }}</ref>
* ''Political Discourses'' (part II of ''[[Essays, Moral, Political, and Literary]]'' within vol. 1 of the larger ''Essays and Treatises on Several Subjects'') Edinburgh (1752). Included in ''Essays and Treatises on Several Subjects'' (1753–56) reprinted 1758–77.
* ''Political Discourses''/''Discours politiques'' (1752–1758), ''My Own Life'' (1776), ''Of Essay Writing'', 1742. Bilingual English-French, translated by Fabien Grandjean. Mauvezin, France: Trans-Europ-Repress, 1993.
* ''[[Four Dissertations]]'' London (1757). Included in reprints of ''Essays and Treatises on Several Subjects'' (above).
* ''[[The History of England (Hume)|The History of England]]'' (Sometimes referred to as ''The History of Great Britain'') (1754–62) More a category of books than a single work, Hume's history spanned "from the invasion of Julius Caesar to the Revolution of 1688" and went through over 100 editions. Many considered it ''the'' standard history of England in its day.
* ''[[The Natural History of Religion]]''. Included in "Four Dissertations" (1757)
* "Sister Peg" (1760) Hume claimed to have authored an anonymous political pamphlet satirizing the failure of the British Parliament to create a Scottish militia in 1760. Although the authorship of the work is disputed, Hume wrote Dr. Alexander Carlyle in early 1761 claiming authorship. The readership of the time attributed the work to [[Adam Ferguson]], a friend and associate of Hume's who has been sometimes called "the founder of modern sociology." Some contemporary scholars concur in the judgment that Ferguson, not Hume, was the author of this work.
* "My Own Life" (1776) Penned in April, shortly before his death, this autobiography was intended for inclusion in a new edition of ''Essays and Treatises on Several Subjects''. It was first published by [[Adam Smith]], who claimed that by doing so he had incurred "ten times more abuse than the very violent attack I had made upon the whole commercial system of Great Britain".<ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/?id=D7Bef_1f_w0C&pg=PA466&dq=david+hume++%22ten+times+more+abuse+%22#v=onepage&q=david%20hume%20%20%22ten%20times%20more%20abuse%20%22&f=false |title=The Oxford Handbook of Adam Smith |publisher=Oxford University Press |page=466 |date=2013 |accessdate=16 March 2017|isbn=9780199605064 |last1=Berry |first1=Christopher J. |last2=Paganelli |first2=Maria Pia |last3=Smith |first3=Craig }}</ref>
* ''[[Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion]]'' (1779) Published posthumously by his nephew, David Hume the Younger. Being a discussion among three fictional characters concerning the nature of God, and is an important portrayal of the argument from design. Despite some controversy, most scholars agree that the view of Philo, the most sceptical of the three, comes closest to Hume's own.


In September 2020, the David Hume Tower, a [[University of Edinburgh]] building, was renamed to [[40 George Square]]; this was following a campaign led by students of the university to rename it, in objection to Hume's writings related to race.<ref>{{cite news |title=Campaign to rename Edinburgh University building named after David Hume wins Students' Union support |url=https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/education/campaign-rename-edinburgh-university-building-named-after-david-hume-wins-students-union-support-2905583 |access-date=18 September 2020 |agency=Edinburgh News}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Hume disciples back name change for university tower |url=https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/hume-disciples-back-name-change-for-university-tower-shvmrh5wd |access-date=18 September 2020 |work=The Times}}</ref><ref name=studentnewspaper2020-09-28/><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Immerwahr |first=John |date=1992 |title=Hume's Revised Racism |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/2709889 |journal=Journal of the History of Ideas |volume=53 |issue=3 |pages=481–486 |doi=10.2307/2709889 |jstor=2709889 |issn=0022-5037 |quote=In 1753 Hume revised his essay "Of National Characters" by adding the following footnote: 'I am apt to suspect the negroes and in general all other species of men (for there are four or five different kinds) to be naturally inferior to the whites. There never was a civilized nation of any other complexion than white, nor even any individual eminent either in action or speculation. No ingenious manufactures amongst them, no arts, no science...'}}</ref>
==See also==

{{Portal|Liberalism|Philosophy}}
== Works ==
{{cmn|colwidth=30em|
* 1734. ''A Kind of History of My Life''. – [[Manuscript|MSS]] 23159 [[National Library of Scotland]].<ref name=":8" /><ref name=":11" />
* [[Age of reason]]
** A letter to an unnamed physician, asking for advice about "the Disease of the Learned" that then afflicted him. Here he reports that at the age of eighteen "there seem'd to be open'd up to me a new Scene of Thought" that made him "throw up every other Pleasure or Business" and turned him to scholarship.<ref name=":8" />
* [[Contributions to liberal theory]]
* 1739–1740. [[A Treatise of Human Nature|''A Treatise of Human Nature: Being an Attempt to introduce the experimental Method of Reasoning into Moral Subjects'']].<ref name=":4" />
** Hume intended to see whether the ''Treatise of Human Nature'' met with success, and if so, to complete it with books devoted to Politics and Criticism. However, as Hume explained, "It fell ''dead-born from the press'', without reaching such distinction as even to excite a murmur among the zealots"<ref name=":2" />{{Rp|352}} and so his further project was not completed.
* 1740. ''[[A Treatise of Human Nature (Abstract)|An Abstract of a Book lately Published: Entitled A Treatise of Human Nature etc]]''.
** Anonymously published, but almost certainly written by Hume<ref group="lower-roman">For this, see: Keynes, J. M. and P. Sraffa. 1965. "Introduction." In ''An Abstract of A Treatise of Human Nature'', by D. Hume (1740). Connecticut: Archon Books</ref> in an attempt to popularise his [[A Treatise of Human Nature|''Treatise'']]. This work is of considerable philosophical interest as it spells out what Hume considered "The Chief Argument" of the ''Treatise'', in a way that seems to anticipate the structure of the ''Enquiry concerning Human Understanding''.
* 1741. ''[[Essays, Moral, Political, and Literary]]'' (2nd ed.)<ref>Hume, David. 1741. ''[https://davidhume.org/texts/empl1/full Essays Moral, Political, and Literary]'' 1. Retrieved 19 May 2020. [https://web.archive.org/web/20180710222300/http://www.davidhume.org/texts/emp.html Archived]. See also [https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/hume-essays-moral-political-literary-lf-ed Liberty Fund edition].</ref>
** A collection of pieces written and published over many years, though most were collected together in 1753–54. Many of the essays are on politics and economics; other topics include [[aesthetics|aesthetic judgement]], love, marriage and polygamy, and the demographics of ancient Greece and Rome. The Essays show some influence from [[Joseph Addison|Addison]]'s ''Tatler'' and ''[[The Spectator (1711)|The Spectator]]'', which Hume read avidly in his youth.
* 1745. ''A Letter from a Gentleman to His Friend in Edinburgh: Containing Some Observations on a Specimen of the Principles concerning Religion and Morality, said to be maintain'd in a Book lately publish'd, intituled A Treatise of Human Nature etc''.
** Contains a letter written by Hume to defend himself against charges of atheism and scepticism, while applying for a chair at Edinburgh University.
* 1742. "Of Essay Writing."<ref>Hume, David. 1993 [1742]. "Of Essay Writing," translated by F. Grandjean. Mauvezin, France: Trans-Europ-Repress.</ref>
* 1748. ''[[An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding]].''
** Contains reworking of the main points of the ''Treatise'', Book 1, with the addition of material on free will (adapted from Book 2), miracles, the Design Argument, and mitigated scepticism. ''[[Of Miracles]]'', section X of the ''Enquiry'', was often published separately.
* 1751. ''[[An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals]].''
** A reworking of material on morality from Book 3 of the ''Treatise'', but with a significantly different emphasis. It "was thought by Hume to be the best of his writings."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=PoI6AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA548 |title=Samson, G., ''The Concise Cambridge History of English Literature'', CUP Archive, 1941, p. 548 |access-date=16 March 2017|last1=Sampson |first1=George |year=1943 }}</ref>
* 1752. ''Political Discourses'' (part II of ''[[Essays, Moral, Political, and Literary]]'' within the larger ''Essays and Treatises on Several Subjects'', vol. 1).
** Included in ''Essays and Treatises on Several Subjects'' (1753–56) reprinted 1758–77.
* 1752–1758. ''Political Discourses''/''Discours politiques''
* 1757. ''[[Four Dissertations]] –'' includes 4 essays:
** "The Natural History of Religion"
** "Of the Passions"
** "Of Tragedy"
** "Of the Standard of Taste"
* 1754–1762. ''[[The History of England (Hume)|The History of England]]'' – sometimes referred to as ''The History of Great Britain''.<ref>Smith, Adam. 1789. ''[[iarchive:historyenglandf00humegoog/page/n8/mode/2up|The History of England, from the Invasion of Julius Cæsar to the Revolution in 1688]]'' 1. London: [[Thomas Cadell (publisher)|Thomas Cadell]] and [[Longman]].</ref>
** More a category of books than a single work, Hume's history spanned "from the invasion of Julius Caesar to the Revolution of 1688" and went through over 100 editions. Many considered it ''the'' standard history of England in its day.
* 1760. "Sister Peg"
** Hume claimed to have authored an anonymous political pamphlet satirizing the failure of the British Parliament to create a Scottish militia in 1760. Although the authorship of the work is disputed, Hume wrote Alexander Carlyle in early 1761 claiming authorship. The readership of the time attributed the work to [[Adam Ferguson]], a friend and associate of Hume's who has been sometimes called "the founder of modern sociology." Some contemporary scholars concur in the judgment that Ferguson, not Hume, was the author of this work.
* 1776. "My Own Life."<ref name=":2" />
** Penned in April, shortly before his death, this autobiography was intended for inclusion in a new edition of ''Essays and Treatises on Several Subjects''. It was first published by [[Adam Smith]], who claimed that by doing so he had incurred "ten times more abuse than the very violent attack I had made upon the whole commercial system of Great Britain."<ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=D7Bef_1f_w0C&pg=PA466 |title=The Oxford Handbook of Adam Smith |publisher=Oxford University Press |page=466 |date=2013 |access-date=16 March 2017|isbn=978-0-19-960506-4 |last1=Berry |first1=Christopher J. |last2=Paganelli |first2=Maria Pia |last3=Smith |first3=Craig }}</ref>
* 1777. "Essays on Suicide and the Immortality of the Soul."<ref>ESSAYS ON SUICIDE AND THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL http://public-library.uk/ebooks/47/13.pdf</ref>
* 1779. ''[[Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion]]''.
** Published posthumously by his nephew, David Hume the Younger. Being a discussion among three fictional characters concerning the nature of God, and is an important portrayal of the argument from design. Despite some controversy, most scholars agree that the view of Philo, the most sceptical of the three, comes closest to Hume's own.

== See also ==
{{Portal|Conservatism|Philosophy|Libertarianism}}
{{cols|colwidth=19em}}
* [[Age of Enlightenment]]
* [[George Anderson (minister)|George Anderson]]
* [[George Anderson (minister)|George Anderson]]
* [[Human science]]
* [[Human science]]
* ''[[Hume Studies]]''
* ''[[Hume Studies]]''
* [[Hume's principle]]
* [[Hume's principle]]
* [[Liberalism]]
* [[Humeanism]]
* [[Mencius]]
* [[Mencius]]
* [[Scientific skepticism|Scientific scepticism]]
* [[Scientific skepticism|Scientific scepticism]]
* [[The Missing Shade of Blue]]
* [[The Missing Shade of Blue]]
{{colend}}
}}


==Notes==
== References ==
{{Reflist|group=note}}


==References==
=== Notes ===
{{Reflist}}
{{Reflist|35em|group=lower-roman}}


==Sources==
=== Citations ===
{{Reflist|refs=
<ref name=studentnewspaper2020-09-28>{{cite news
| url = https://cms.studentnewspaper.org/renaming-dht-was-a-necessary-antiracist-step-but-only-the-first-of-many/
| title = Renaming DHT was a necessary antiracist step, but only the first of many
| work = [[The Student (newspaper)|The Student]]
| author = Millie Lord
| date = 28 September 2020
| access-date = 30 September 2020
| archive-date = 13 January 2021
| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20210113141829/https://cms.studentnewspaper.org/renaming-dht-was-a-necessary-antiracist-step-but-only-the-first-of-many/
| url-status = dead
}}</ref>
}}

=== Bibliography ===
{{refbegin|30em}}
{{refbegin|30em}}
* {{Cite journal | last=Adair | first=Douglass | title="That Politics May Be Reduced to a Science": David Hume, James Madison, and the Tenth Federalist | authorlink=Douglass Adair | journal=[[Huntington Library Quarterly]] | volume=20 | issue=4 |pages=343–360 | jstor=3816276 | doi= 10.2307/3816276| ref=harv| year=1957 }}
* {{Cite journal | last=Adair | first=Douglass | title="That Politics May Be Reduced to a Science": David Hume, James Madison, and the Tenth Federalist | author-link=Douglass Adair | journal=[[Huntington Library Quarterly]] | volume=20 | issue=4 |pages=343–360 | jstor=3816276 | doi= 10.2307/3816276| year=1957 }}
* {{Cite book | last=Ahluwalia | first=Libby | title=Understanding Philosophy of Religion | publisher=[[Folens]] | year=2008 | edition=illustrated | isbn= 9781850082644 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=-PCV11VQ8PYC | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Ahluwalia | first=Libby | title=Understanding Philosophy of Religion | publisher=[[Folens]] | year=2008 | edition=illustrated | isbn=978-1-85008-264-4 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=-PCV11VQ8PYC }}
* Anderson, R. F. (1966). ''Hume's First Principles'', [[University of Nebraska Press]], Lincoln.
* Anderson, R. F. (1966). ''Hume's First Principles'', [[University of Nebraska Press]], Lincoln.
* {{Cite book | editor-last=Angier | editor-first=Tom | title=Ethics: The Key Thinkers | series=Key Thinkers | volume=12 | publisher=[[A&C Black]] | year=2012 | isbn= 9781441149398 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ndyMavMbiZMC | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | editor-last=Angier | editor-first=Tom | title=Ethics: The Key Thinkers | volume=12 | publisher=[[A&C Black]] | year=2012 | isbn=978-1-4411-4939-8 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ndyMavMbiZMC }}
* {{Cite book | editor-last=Atherton | editor-first=Margaret | title=The Empiricists: Critical Essays on Locke, Berkeley, and Hume | series=Critical essays on the classics | publisher=[[Rowman & Littlefield]] | year=1999 | isbn=9780847689132 | url=https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Empiricists.html?id=5oXqnQEACAAJ | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | editor-last=Atherton | editor-first=Margaret | title=The Empiricists: Critical Essays on Locke, Berkeley, and Hume | series=Critical essays on the classics | publisher=[[Rowman & Littlefield]] | year=1999 | isbn=978-0-8476-8913-2 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=5oXqnQEACAAJ }}
* {{Cite book | last=Ayer | first=Alfred Jules | title=Language, Truth and Logic | publisher=[[Penguin Books]] | year=1946 | edition=reprint | url=https://archive.org/details/AlfredAyer | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Ayer | first=Alfred Jules | title=Language, Truth and Logic | publisher=[[Penguin Books]] | year=1946 | edition=reprint | url=https://archive.org/details/AlfredAyer }}
* {{Cite book | last1= Bailey | first1= Alan | last2= O'Brien | first2= Dan | title= Hume's 'Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding': A Reader's Guide | series= Continuum reader's guides | year= 2006 | isbn= 9780826485090 | publisher=[[A&C Black]] | url= https://books.google.com/books?id=XBpXPoRyocwC | ref= harv}}
* {{Cite book | last1= Bailey | first1= Alan | last2= O'Brien | first2= Dan | title= Hume's 'Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding': A Reader's Guide | series= Continuum reader's guides | year= 2006 | isbn= 978-0-8264-8509-0 | publisher= [[A&C Black]] | url= https://books.google.com/books?id=XBpXPoRyocwC }}
* {{Cite book | last=Bassett | first=Kate | title=In Two Minds: a Biography of Jonathan Miller | publisher=[[Oberon Books]] | year=2012 | isbn=9781849437387 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=MkTSD5UHu8AC | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Bassett | first=Kate | title=In Two Minds: a Biography of Jonathan Miller | publisher=[[Oberon Books]] | year=2012 | isbn=978-1-84943-738-7 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=MkTSD5UHu8AC }}{{Dead link|date=July 2023 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}
* {{cite magazine | title=Great Thinkers of the Scottish Enlightenment | magazine=[[BBC History]] | date=14 September 2014 | url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/history/scottishhistory/enlightenment/features_enlightenment_enlightenment.shtml | ref = {{harvid|BBC History|2014}}}}
* {{cite magazine | title=Great Thinkers of the Scottish Enlightenment | magazine=[[BBC History]] | date=14 September 2014 | url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/history/scottishhistory/enlightenment/features_enlightenment_enlightenment.shtml | ref={{harvid|BBC History|2014}} }}
* {{Cite journal | last=Blackburn | first=Simon | title=Hume and Thick Connexions | authorlink=Simon Blackburn | journal=[[Philosophy and Phenomenological Research]] | volume=50, Supplement | date=Autumn 1990 | pages=237–250 | jstor=2108041 | ref=harv| doi=10.2307/2108041 }}
* {{Cite journal | last=Blackburn | first=Simon | title=Hume and Thick Connexions | author-link=Simon Blackburn | journal=[[Philosophy and Phenomenological Research]] | volume=50, Supplement | date=Autumn 1990 | pages=237–250 | jstor=2108041 | doi=10.2307/2108041 }}
* {{Cite journal | last=Blackburn | first=Simon | title=Practical Tortoise Raising | authorlink=Simon Blackburn | journal=[[Mind (journal)|Mind]] | volume=104 | issue=416 | edition=New Series |date=October 1995 | pages=695–711 | jstor=2254478 | ref=harv | doi=10.1093/mind/104.416.695}}
* {{Cite journal | last=Blackburn | first=Simon | title=Practical Tortoise Raising | author-link=Simon Blackburn | journal=[[Mind (journal)|Mind]] | volume=104 | issue=416 | edition=New Series |date=October 1995 | pages=695–711 | jstor=2254478 | doi=10.1093/mind/104.416.695}}
* Bongie, L. L. (1998). ''David Hume&nbsp;– Prophet of the Counter-Revolution''. Liberty Fund, Indianapolis
* Bongie, L. L. (1998). ''David Hume&nbsp;– Prophet of the Counter-Revolution''. Liberty Fund, Indianapolis
* {{Cite book | last=Boswell | first=James | title=Boswell in Extremes, 1776–1778 | editor1-last=Weis | editor1-first=Charles McC. | editor2-last=Pottle | editor2-first=Frederick A. | series=Yale editions of the private papers of James Boswell | publisher=[[Yale University]] | year=1970 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ctz1MgEACAAJ | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Boswell | first=James | title=Boswell in Extremes, 1776–1778 | editor1-last=Weis | editor1-first=Charles McC. | editor2-last=Pottle | editor2-first=Frederick A. | series=Yale editions of the private papers of James Boswell | publisher=[[Yale University]] | year=1970 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ctz1MgEACAAJ }}
* Broackes, Justin (1995). ''Hume, David'', in Ted Honderich (ed.) ''The Oxford Companion to Philosophy'', New York, Oxford University Press
* Broackes, Justin (1995). ''Hume, David'', in Ted Honderich (ed.) ''The Oxford Companion to Philosophy'', New York, Oxford University Press
* {{Cite book | editor-last=Brown | editor-first=Stuart | title=Dictionary of Twentieth-Century British Philosophers | publisher=[[A&C Black]] | year=2005 | isbn= 9781843710967 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=uL3UAwAAQBAJ | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | editor-last=Brown | editor-first=Stuart | title=Dictionary of Twentieth-Century British Philosophers | publisher=[[A&C Black]] | year=2005 | isbn=978-1-84371-096-7 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=uL3UAwAAQBAJ }}
* {{Cite journal | last=Buckle | first=Stephen | title=Hume's biography and Hume's philosophy | journal=[[Australasian Journal of Philosophy]] | volume=77 | issue=1 | date=March 1999 | pages=1–25 | ref=harv | doi=10.1080/00048409912348781}}
* {{Cite journal | last=Buckle | first=Stephen | title=Hume's biography and Hume's philosophy | journal=[[Australasian Journal of Philosophy]] | volume=77 | issue=1 | date=March 1999 | pages=1–25 | doi=10.1080/00048409912348781}}
* {{Cite book | last=Burton | first=John Hill | title=Life and Correspondence of David Hume | volume=2 | publisher=[[William Tait (publisher)|William Tait]] | year=1846 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=CDYfAAAAMAAJ | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Burton | first=John Hill | title=Life and Correspondence of David Hume | volume=2 | publisher=[[William Tait (publisher)|William Tait]] | year=1846 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=CDYfAAAAMAAJ }}
* {{Cite book | last1=Carroll | first1=John W. | last2= Markosian | first2=Ned |authorlink2=Ned Markosian | title=An Introduction to Metaphysics | series=Cambridge Introductions to Philosophy | publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] | year=2010 | isbn= 9780521826297 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=f6bcZq4_4gUC | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last1=Carroll | first1=John W. | last2=Markosian | first2=Ned | author-link2=Ned Markosian | title=An Introduction to Metaphysics | series=Cambridge Introductions to Philosophy | publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] | year=2010 | isbn=978-0-521-82629-7 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=f6bcZq4_4gUC }}
* {{Cite book | last=Copleston | first=Frederick | title=A History of Philosophy | authorlink=Frederick Copleston | volume=6 | publisher=[[A&C Black]] | year=1999 | isbn= 9780860122999 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=BMjrs7-gk9oC | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Copleston | first=Frederick | title=A History of Philosophy | author-link=Frederick Copleston | volume=6 | publisher=[[A&C Black]] | year=1999 | isbn=978-0-86012-299-9 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=BMjrs7-gk9oC }}
* {{Cite book | last=Costelloe | first=Timothy M. | title=Aesthetics and Morals in the Philosophy of David Hume | series=Routledge Studies in Eighteenth-Century Philosophy | publisher=[[Routledge]] | year=2013 | isbn= 9781135197872 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=MH3_R04jW80C | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Costelloe | first=Timothy M. | title=Aesthetics and Morals in the Philosophy of David Hume | series=Routledge Studies in Eighteenth-Century Philosophy | publisher=[[Routledge]] | year=2013 | isbn=978-1-135-19787-2 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=MH3_R04jW80C }}
* {{Cite book | last=Coventry | first= Angela M. | title=Hume's Theory of Causation | series=Continuum Studies in British Philosophy | publisher=[[A&C Black]] | year=2006 | isbn= 9781847142221 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=gq348MmuojAC | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Coventry | first=Angela M. | title=Hume's Theory of Causation | series=Continuum Studies in British Philosophy | publisher=[[A&C Black]] | year=2006 | isbn=978-1-84714-222-1 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=gq348MmuojAC }}
* {{Cite book | last=Craig | first= Edward | title=The Mind of God and the Works of Man | authorlink= Edward Craig (philosopher) | publisher=[[Clarendon Press]] | year=1987 | isbn= 9780198249337 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=znkFAQAAIAAJ | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Craig | first=Edward | title=The Mind of God and the Works of Man | author-link=Edward Craig (philosopher) | publisher=[[Clarendon Press]] | year=1987 | isbn=978-0-19-824933-7 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=znkFAQAAIAAJ }}
* {{cite web | last= Cranston | first= Maurice | authorlink= Maurice Cranston | title= David Hume – Scottish philosopher. Morals and historical writing | date= 16 November 2014 | encyclopedia= [[Encyclopædia Britannica]] | url= http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/276139/David-Hume/12264/Morals-and-historical-writing | ref= harv}}
* {{cite encyclopedia | last= Cranston | first= Maurice | author-link= Maurice Cranston | title= David Hume – Scottish philosopher. Morals and historical writing | date= 16 November 2014 | encyclopedia= [[Encyclopædia Britannica]] | url= https://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/276139/David-Hume/12264/Morals-and-historical-writing }}
* Daiches D., Jones P., Jones J. (eds). ''The Scottish Enlightenment: 1730–1790 A Hotbed of Genius'' The University of Edinburgh, 1986. In paperback, The Saltire Society, 1996 {{ISBN|0-85411-069-0}}
* Daiches D., Jones P., Jones J. (eds). ''The Scottish Enlightenment: 1730–1790 A Hotbed of Genius'' The University of Edinburgh, 1986. In paperback, The Saltire Society, 1996 {{ISBN|978-0-85411-069-8}}
* {{Cite book | last=Dauer | first=Francis Watanabe | chapter= Hume on the Relation of Cause and Effect | editor-last= Radcliffe | editor-first= Elizabeth S. | year= 2010 | pages=89–105 | title= A Companion to Hume | publisher = [[John Wiley & Sons]] | isbn= 9781444337860 | chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=6ECxW_2tAf0C | doi=10.1002/9780470696583.ch5 | ref= harv}}
* {{Cite book | last= Dauer | first= Francis Watanabe | chapter= Hume on the Relation of Cause and Effect | editor-last= Radcliffe | editor-first= Elizabeth S. | year= 2010 | pages= 89–105 | title= A Companion to Hume | publisher= [[John Wiley & Sons]] | isbn= 978-1-4443-3786-0 | chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=6ECxW_2tAf0C | doi= 10.1002/9780470696583.ch5 }}
* {{Cite book | last=Dees | first=Richard H. | chapter= Chapter 21. 'One of the Finest and Most Subtle Inventions': Hume on Government | editor-last= Radcliffe | editor-first= Elizabeth S. | year= 2010 | pages=388–405 | title= A Companion to Hume | publisher = [[John Wiley & Sons]] | isbn= 9781444337860 | chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=6ECxW_2tAf0C | doi=10.1002/9780470696583.ch6 | ref= harv}}
* {{Cite book | last= Dees | first= Richard H. | chapter= Chapter 21. 'One of the Finest and Most Subtle Inventions': Hume on Government | editor-last= Radcliffe | editor-first= Elizabeth S. | year= 2010 | pages= 388–405 | title= A Companion to Hume | publisher= [[John Wiley & Sons]] | isbn= 978-1-4443-3786-0 | chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=6ECxW_2tAf0C | doi= 10.1002/9780470696583.ch6 }}
* {{Cite book | last=Dennett | first=Daniel C. | authorlink=Daniel Dennett | chapter= Chapter 3. Atheism and Evolution | editor1-last= Zagzebski | editor1-first= Linda | editor1-link= Linda Zagzebski | editor2-last= Miller | editor2-first= Timothy D. | editor2-link= Timothy Miller | year= 2009 | pages=614–635 | title= Readings in Philosophy of Religion: Ancient to Contemporary | publisher = [[John Wiley & Sons]] | isbn= 9781405180924 | chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=i1tNI9646Q4C | ref= harv}}
* {{Cite book | last= Dennett | first= Daniel C. | author-link= Daniel Dennett | chapter= Chapter 3. Atheism and Evolution | editor1-last= Zagzebski | editor1-first= Linda | editor1-link= Linda Zagzebski | editor2-last= Miller | editor2-first= Timothy D. | editor2-link= Timothy Miller | year= 2009 | pages= 614–635 | title= Readings in Philosophy of Religion: Ancient to Contemporary | publisher= [[John Wiley & Sons]] | isbn= 978-1-4051-8092-4 | chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=i1tNI9646Q4C }}
* {{Cite book | last=Dicker | first=Georges | title=Hume's Epistemology and Metaphysics: An Introduction | publisher=[[Routledge]] | year=2002 | isbn= 9781134714254 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=lnGGAgAAQBAJ | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Dicker | first=Georges | title=Hume's Epistemology and Metaphysics: An Introduction | publisher=[[Routledge]] | year=2002 | isbn=978-1-134-71425-4 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=lnGGAgAAQBAJ }}
* {{Cite book | last= Edwards | first= Peter | chapter= The future of ethics | editor-last= Leaman | editor-first= Oliver | editor-link= Oliver Leaman | year= 2002 | pages=41–61 | title= The Future of Philosophy: Towards the Twenty First Century | publisher = [[Routledge]] | isbn= 9781134824571 | chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=0pGKAgAAQBAJ | ref= harv}}
* {{Cite book | last= Edwards | first= Peter | chapter= The future of ethics | editor-last= Leaman | editor-first= Oliver | editor-link= Oliver Leaman | year= 2002 | pages= 41–61 | title= The Future of Philosophy: Towards the Twenty First Century | publisher= [[Routledge]] | isbn= 978-1-134-82457-1 | chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=0pGKAgAAQBAJ }}
* Einstein, A. (1915) ''Letter to [[Moritz Schlick]]'', Schwarzschild, B. (trans. & ed.) in ''The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein'', vol. 8A, R. Schulmann, A. J. Fox, J. Illy, (eds.) Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (1998), p.&nbsp;220.
* Einstein, A. (1915) ''Letter to [[Moritz Schlick]]'', Schwarzschild, B. (trans. & ed.) in ''The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein'', vol. 8A, R. Schulmann, A. J. Fox, J. Illy, (eds.) Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (1998), p.&nbsp;220.
* {{Cite book | last=Emerson | first=Roger L. | title=Essays on David Hume Medical Men and the Scottish Enlightenment: Industry Knowledge and Humanity | series=Science, Technology and Culture, 1700–1945 | publisher=[[Ashgate Publishing]] | year=2009 | isbn=9780754693383 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=YqsBDKDOFLkC | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Emerson | first=Roger L. | title=Essays on David Hume Medical Men and the Scottish Enlightenment: Industry Knowledge and Humanity | series=Science, Technology and Culture, 1700–1945 | publisher=[[Ashgate Publishing]] | year=2009 | isbn=978-0-7546-9338-3 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=YqsBDKDOFLkC }}
* {{Cite book | last=Fieser | first=James | title=A Bibliography of Hume's Writings and Early Responses | publisher=Thoemmes Press | year=2003 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=smlEkQ_G2gwC | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Fieser | first=James | title=A Bibliography of Hume's Writings and Early Responses | publisher=Thoemmes Press | year=2003 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=smlEkQ_G2gwC }}
* {{Cite book | last=Fieser | first=James | title=Early Responses to Hume's Life And Reputation | volume=9/10 | publisher=[[A & C Black]] | year=2005 | isbn=9781843711155 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ez2AnM4nF9QC | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Fieser | first=James | title=Early Responses to Hume's Life And Reputation | volume=9/10 | publisher=[[A & C Black]] | year=2005 | isbn=978-1-84371-115-5 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ez2AnM4nF9QC }}
* {{Cite journal | last=Fisher | first=A. R. J. | title=Causal and Logical Necessity in Malebranche's Occasionalism | journal=[[Canadian Journal of Philosophy]] | issn=1911-0820 | volume=41 | issue=4 | date=December 2011 | pages=523–48 | url=http://arfish01.mysite.syr.edu/docs/malebranche.2011.cjp.41.4.pdf | doi=10.1353/cjp.2011.0043 | ref=harv | url-status=dead | archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20150205002516/http://arfish01.mysite.syr.edu/docs/malebranche.2011.cjp.41.4.pdf | archivedate=5 February 2015 | df=dmy-all }}
* {{Cite journal | last=Fisher | first=A. R. J. | title=Causal and Logical Necessity in Malebranche's Occasionalism | journal=[[Canadian Journal of Philosophy]] | issn=1911-0820 | volume=41 | issue=4 | date=December 2011 | pages=523–548 | url=http://arfish01.mysite.syr.edu/docs/malebranche.2011.cjp.41.4.pdf | doi=10.1353/cjp.2011.0043 | s2cid=55643409 | url-status=dead | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150205002516/http://arfish01.mysite.syr.edu/docs/malebranche.2011.cjp.41.4.pdf | archive-date=5 February 2015 }}
* Flew, A. (1986). ''David Hume: Philosopher of Moral Science'', Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
* Flew, A. (1986). ''David Hume: Philosopher of Moral Science'', Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
* {{Cite book | last=Fodor | first=Jerry A. | title=Hume Variations | series=Lines of thought | publisher=[[Clarendon Press]] | year=2003 | isbn=9780199264056 | url=https://books.google.com/books/about/Hume_Variations.html?id=2E7LYzEbWwYC | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Fodor | first=Jerry A. | title=Hume Variations | series=Lines of thought | publisher=[[Clarendon Press]] | year=2003 | isbn=978-0-19-926405-6 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2E7LYzEbWwYC }}
* Fogelin, R. J. (1993). ''Hume's scepticism''. In Norton, D. F. (ed.) (1993). ''The Cambridge Companion to Hume'', Cambridge University Press, pp.&nbsp;90–116.
* Fogelin, R. J. (1993). ''Hume's scepticism''. In Norton, D. F. (ed.) (1993). ''The Cambridge Companion to Hume'', Cambridge University Press, pp.&nbsp;90–116.
* {{Cite book | last=Forbes | first=Duncan | title= Hume's Philosophical Politics | authorlink=Duncan Forbes (historian) | series=Cambridge paperback library | edition=reprint | publisher=CUP Archive | year=1985 | isbn= 9780521319973 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=PX86AAAAIAAJ | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Forbes | first=Duncan | title=Hume's Philosophical Politics | author-link=Duncan Forbes (historian) | series=Cambridge paperback library | edition=reprint | publisher=CUP Archive | year=1985 | isbn=978-0-521-31997-3 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=PX86AAAAIAAJ }}
* Garfield, Jay L. (1995) ''The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way'' Oxford University Press
* {{cite book|last=Garfield|first=Jay L.|title=The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way|publisher=Oxford University Press|date=1995}}
* {{cite book|last=Garfield|first=Jay L.|title=Engaging Buddhism|publisher=Oxford University Press|date=2015|isbn=978-0-19-020433-4}}
* {{cite journal | last = Giles | first = James | title = The No-Self Theory: Hume, Buddhism, and Personal Identity |date=April 1993 | journal = [[Philosophy East and West]] | volume = 43 | issue = 2 | pages = 175–200 | doi=10.2307/1399612 | jstor=1399612 | ref=harv}}
* {{cite journal | last = Gopnik | first = Alison | title = Could David Hume Have Known about Buddhism?: Charles François Dolu, the Royal College of La Flèche, and the Global Jesuit Intellectual Network | journal = [[Hume Studies]] | year = 2009 | issn=0319-7336 | volume = 35 | issue =1 and 2 | pages = 5–28 | url=http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hms/summary/v035/35.1-2.gopnik.html | ref=harv}}
* {{cite journal | last = Giles | first = James | title = The No-Self Theory: Hume, Buddhism, and Personal Identity | date = April 1993 | journal = [[Philosophy East and West]] | volume = 43 | issue = 2 | pages = 175–200 | doi = 10.2307/1399612 | jstor = 1399612 | s2cid = 147497625 | url = http://mindrxiv.org/yq8gz//download }}
* {{cite journal | last = Gopnik | first = Alison | title = Could David Hume Have Known about Buddhism?: Charles François Dolu, the Royal College of La Flèche, and the Global Jesuit Intellectual Network | journal = [[Hume Studies]] | year = 2009 | issn = 0319-7336 | volume = 35 | issue = 1 and 2 | pages = 5–28 | url = http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hms/summary/v035/35.1-2.gopnik.html }}
* {{Cite book | last= Gracyk | first= Ted | chapter= Hume's Aesthetics | editor-last= Zalta | editor-first= Edward N. | editor-link= Edward Zalta | year= 2011 | title= The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy | chapterurl= http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2011/entries/hume-aesthetics/ | ref= harv| title-link= The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy }}
* {{Cite book | last= Gracyk | first= Ted | chapter= Hume's Aesthetics | editor-last= Zalta | editor-first= Edward N. | editor-link= Edward Zalta | year= 2011 | title= The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy | chapter-url= http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2011/entries/hume-aesthetics/ | title-link= The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy | publisher= Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University }}
* Graham, R. (2004). ''The Great Infidel&nbsp;– A Life of David Hume''. John Donald, Edinburgh.
* Graham, R. (2004). ''The Great Infidel&nbsp;– A Life of David Hume''. John Donald, Edinburgh.
* {{Cite book | editor-last= Harris | editor-first= James A. | year= 2013 | title= The Oxford Handbook of British Philosophy in the Eighteenth Century | series=Oxford Handbooks in Philosophy | publisher= [[Oxford University Press]] | isbn= 9780199549023 | url= https://books.google.com/books?id=zWMBAQAAQBAJ | ref= harv}}
* {{Cite book | editor-last= Harris | editor-first= James A. | year= 2013 | title= The Oxford Handbook of British Philosophy in the Eighteenth Century | series= Oxford Handbooks in Philosophy | publisher= [[Oxford University Press]] | isbn= 978-0-19-954902-3 | url= https://books.google.com/books?id=zWMBAQAAQBAJ }}
* {{Cite book|first=James A.|last=Harris|title=Hume: An Intellectual Biography|location=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2015|isbn= 9780521837255|ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book|first=James A.|last=Harris|title=Hume: An Intellectual Biography|location=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2015|isbn= 978-0-521-83725-5}}
* {{Cite book | first= Errol E. | last= Harris | year = 2004 | title= Hypothesis and Perception: The Roots of Scientific Method | volume= 10 | publisher = [[Psychology Press]] | isbn= 9780415296151 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=uBbfizzKTDoC | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | first= Errol E. | last= Harris | year= 2004 | title= Hypothesis and Perception: The Roots of Scientific Method | volume= 10 | publisher= [[Psychology Press]] | isbn= 978-0-415-29615-1 | url= https://books.google.com/books?id=uBbfizzKTDoC }}
* Harwood, Sterling (1996). "Moral Sensibility Theories", in The Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Supplement) (New York: Macmillan Publishing Co.).
* Harwood, Sterling (1996). "Moral Sensibility Theories", in The Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Supplement) (New York: Macmillan Publishing Co.).
* {{Cite journal | last = Hobart | first = R. E. | authorlink=R. E. Hobart | title = Free Will as Involving Determination and Inconceivable Without It | journal = [[Mind (journal)|Mind]] | volume = 43 | year = 1934 | pages = 1–27 | doi = 10.1093/mind/XLIII.169.1 | issue = 169 | jstor=2250169 | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite journal | last = Hobart | first = R. E. | author-link=R. E. Hobart | title = Free Will as Involving Determination and Inconceivable Without It | journal = [[Mind (journal)|Mind]] | volume = 43 | year = 1934 | pages = 1–27 | doi = 10.1093/mind/XLIII.169.1 | issue = 169 | jstor=2250169 }}
* {{Cite book | last = Humber | first = James M. | chapter = Hume | title= The World's Great Philosophers | editor-last= Arrington | editor-first= Robert L. | publisher = [[John Wiley & Sons]] | year = 2008 | pages = 126–137 | isbn= 9780470692950 | chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=dh-E6oIlCkAC | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last = Humber | first = James M. | chapter = Hume | title = The World's Great Philosophers | editor-last = Arrington | editor-first = Robert L. | publisher = [[John Wiley & Sons]] | year = 2008 | pages = 126–137 | isbn = 978-0-470-69295-0 | chapter-url = https://books.google.com/books?id=dh-E6oIlCkAC }}
* {{Cite book | last= Hume | first= David | title= An Abstract of a Book lately Published; Entitled, 'A Treatise of Human Nature', &c. Wherein the Chief Argument of that Book is farther Illustrated and Explained | year= 1740 | publisher= C. Borbett | place= London | url= http://www.davidhume.org/texts/abs.html | ref= harv | access-date= 28 February 2015 | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20180617012157/http://davidhume.org/texts/abs.html | archive-date= 17 June 2018 | url-status= dead }}
* {{Cite book | last= Hume | first= David | title= An Abstract of a Book lately Published; Entitled, 'A Treatise of Human Nature', &c. Wherein the Chief Argument of that Book is farther Illustrated and Explained | year= 1740 | publisher= C. Borbett | place= London | url= http://www.davidhume.org/texts/abs.html | access-date= 28 February 2015 | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20180617012157/http://davidhume.org/texts/abs.html | archive-date= 17 June 2018 | url-status= dead }}
* Hume, D. (1751). ''An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals''. David Hume, ''Essays Moral, Political, and Literary'' edited with preliminary dissertations and notes by T.H. Green and T.H. Grose, 1:1–8. London: Longmans, Green 1907.
* Hume, D. (1751). ''An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals''. David Hume, ''Essays Moral, Political, and Literary'' edited with preliminary dissertations and notes by T.H. Green and T.H. Grose, 1:1–8. London: Longmans, Green 1907.
* {{Cite book | last= Hume | first= David | title= An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding | year= 1777 | origyear= 1748 | publisher= A. Millar | place= London | url= http://www.davidhume.org/texts/ehu.html | ref= harv | access-date= 14 March 2015 | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20180710232433/http://www.davidhume.org/texts/ehu.html | archive-date= 10 July 2018 | url-status= dead }}
* {{Cite book | last= Hume | first= David | title= An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding | year= 1777 | orig-date= 1748 | publisher= A. Millar | place= London | url= http://www.davidhume.org/texts/ehu.html | access-date= 14 March 2015 | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20180710232433/http://www.davidhume.org/texts/ehu.html | archive-date= 10 July 2018 | url-status= dead }}
* {{Cite book | last= Hume | first= David | title= A Treatise of Human Nature | year= 1739 | publisher= John Noon | place= London | url= http://www.davidhume.org/texts/thn.html | ref= harv | access-date= 11 March 2015 | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20180712120258/http://www.davidhume.org/texts/thn.html | archive-date= 12 July 2018 | url-status= dead }}
* {{Cite book | last= Hume | first= David | title= A Treatise of Human Nature | year= 1739 | publisher= John Noon | place= London | url= http://www.davidhume.org/texts/thn.html | access-date= 11 March 2015 | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20180712120258/http://www.davidhume.org/texts/thn.html | archive-date= 12 July 2018 | url-status= dead }}
* {{Cite book | last= Hume | first= David | title= Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion | year= 1779 | url= http://www.davidhume.org/texts/dnr.html | ref= harv | access-date= 22 April 2015 | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20180624075232/http://davidhume.org/texts/dnr.html | archive-date= 24 June 2018 | url-status= dead }}
* {{Cite book | last= Hume | first= David | title= Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion | year= 1779 | url= http://www.davidhume.org/texts/dnr.html | access-date= 22 April 2015 | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20180624075232/http://davidhume.org/texts/dnr.html | archive-date= 24 June 2018 | url-status= dead }}
* {{Cite book | last= Hume | first= David | title= Essays, Moral and Political | year= 1741 | publisher= A. Kincaid | place= Edinburgh | url= http://www.davidhume.org/texts/emp.html | ref= harv | access-date= 7 April 2015 | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20180710222300/http://www.davidhume.org/texts/emp.html | archive-date= 10 July 2018 | url-status= dead }}
* {{Cite book | last= Hume | first= David | title= Essays, Moral and Political | year= 1741 | publisher= A. Kincaid | place= Edinburgh | url= http://www.davidhume.org/texts/emp.html | access-date= 7 April 2015 | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20180710222300/http://www.davidhume.org/texts/emp.html | archive-date= 10 July 2018 | url-status= dead }}
* {{Cite book | last= Hume | first= David | chapter= Idea of a Perfect Commonwealth | editor-last= Miller | editor-first= Eugene F. | year = 1987 | title= Essays, Moral, Political, and Literary | publisher = Library Fund, Inc. | place=Indianapolis | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last= Hume | first= David | chapter= Idea of a Perfect Commonwealth | editor-last= Miller | editor-first= Eugene F. | year = 1987 | title= Essays, Moral, Political, and Literary | publisher = Library Fund, Inc. | place=Indianapolis }}
* {{Cite book | last= Hume | first= David | title= Letters of David Hume to William Strahan | editor-last= Hill | editor-first= George Birkbeck Norman | year = 1888 | publisher= [[Clarendon Press]] | place= Oxford | url=https://archive.org/stream/cu31924029078776/cu31924029078776_djvu.txt| ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last= Hume | first= David | title= Letters of David Hume to William Strahan | editor-last= Hill | editor-first= George Birkbeck Norman | year= 1888 | publisher= [[Clarendon Press]] | place= Oxford | url= https://archive.org/stream/cu31924029078776/cu31924029078776_djvu.txt }}
* {{Cite book | last= Hume | first= David | chapter= The Natural History of Religion | title= Four Dissertations | year = 1757 | publisher= A. Millar | place=London | chapter-url=http://www.davidhume.org/texts/fd.html | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last= Hume | first= David | chapter= The Natural History of Religion | title= Four Dissertations | year= 1757 | publisher= A. Millar | place= London | chapter-url= http://www.davidhume.org/texts/fd.html | access-date= 7 April 2015 | archive-date= 16 April 2015 | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20150416125213/http://www.davidhume.org/texts/fd.html | url-status= dead }}
* {{Cite book | last= Hume | first= David | chapter= Appendix C: From Adam Smith, The Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759) | editor1-last= Falkenstein | editor1-first= Lorne | editor2-last=McArthur | editor2-first= Neil | year = 2013 | title= Essays and Treatises on Philosophical Subjects | series=Broadview editions | publisher = [[Broadview Press]] | chapterurl=https://books.google.com/books?id=93OaZl2pmCcC&pg=PA548&dq=Hume++adam+smith+close+friend+sentiment&hl=en&sa=X&ei=vbWIVMnAKcq3UfTeg7gC&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=Hume%20%20adam%20smith%20close%20friend%20sentiment&f=false | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=93OaZl2pmCcC | isbn= 9781551118048 | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last= Hume | first= David | chapter= Appendix C: From Adam Smith, The Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759) | editor1-last= Falkenstein | editor1-first= Lorne | editor2-last= McArthur | editor2-first= Neil | year= 2013 | title= Essays and Treatises on Philosophical Subjects | series= Broadview editions | publisher= [[Broadview Press]] | chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=93OaZl2pmCcC&q=Hume++adam+smith+close+friend+sentiment&pg=PA548 | url= https://books.google.com/books?id=93OaZl2pmCcC | isbn= 978-1-55111-804-8 }}
* {{Cite book | last= Hume | first= David | chapter= A Kind of History of My Life | editor-last= Norton | editor-first= David Fate | year = 1993 | title= The Cambridge Companion to Hume | publisher = [[Cambridge University Press]] | chapterurl=https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/A_kind_of_history_of_my_life | isbn= 9780521387101 | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last= Hume | first= David | chapter= A Kind of History of My Life | editor-last= Norton | editor-first= David Fate | year= 1993 | title= The Cambridge Companion to Hume | publisher= [[Cambridge University Press]] | chapter-url= https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/A_kind_of_history_of_my_life | isbn= 978-0-521-38710-1 }}
* Hume, D. (1752–1758). ''Political Discourses'':Bilingual English-French (translated by Fabien Grandjean). Mauvezin, France, Trans-Europ-Repress, 1993, 22&nbsp;cm, V-260 p. Bibliographic notes, index.
* Hume, D. (1752–1758). ''Political Discourses'':Bilingual English-French (translated by Fabien Grandjean). Mauvezin, France, Trans-Europ-Repress, 1993, 22&nbsp;cm, V-260 p. Bibliographic notes, index.
* {{Cite book | last= Hume | first= David | title= The Letters of David Hume: 1727–1765 | editor-last= Greig | editor-first= J.Y.T. | year = 2011 | series=The Letters of David Hume | volume=1 | publisher = [[Oxford University Press]] | isbn=9780199693245 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=f-YghlmN108C | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last= Hume | first= David | title= The Letters of David Hume: 1727–1765 | editor-last= Greig | editor-first= J.Y.T. | year= 2011 | volume= 1 | publisher= [[Oxford University Press]] | isbn= 978-0-19-969324-5 | url= https://books.google.com/books?id=f-YghlmN108C }}
* {{Cite book | last=Hume | first=David | title=The History of England, from the Invasion of Julius Cæsar to the Revolution in 1688 | volume=1 | chapter=My Own Life | pages=1–21 | year=1778 | place=London | publisher=via [[Rutgers University]], edited by Jack Lynch | chapterurl=http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Texts/humelife.html | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Hume | first=David | title=The History of England, from the Invasion of Julius Cæsar to the Revolution in 1688 | volume=1 | chapter=My Own Life | pages=1–21 | year=1778 | place=London | publisher=via [[Rutgers University]], edited by Jack Lynch | chapter-url=http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Texts/humelife.html | access-date=25 February 2015 | archive-date=16 January 2018 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180116061536/http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Texts/humelife.html | url-status=dead }}
* {{Cite book | last=Hume | first=David | title=The History of England, from the Invasion of Julius Cæsar to the Revolution in 1688 |volume=1 |chapter=Letter from Adam Smith, LL.D. to William Strathan, Esq. | pages=xix–xxiv | year=1789 | place=London | publisher=[[Thomas Cadell (publisher)|Thomas Cadell]] and [[Longman]] | chapterurl=https://archive.org/stream/historyenglandf00humegoog#page/n21/mode/2up | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Hume | first=David | title=The History of England, from the Invasion of Julius Cæsar to the Revolution in 1688 | volume=1 | chapter=Letter from Adam Smith, LL.D. to William Strathan, Esq. | pages=xix–xxiv | year=1789 | place=London | publisher=[[Thomas Cadell (publisher)|Thomas Cadell]] and [[Longman]] | chapter-url=https://archive.org/stream/historyenglandf00humegoog#page/n21/mode/2up }}
* Husserl, E. (1970). ''The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology'', Carr, D. (trans.), [[Northwestern University Press]], Evanston.
* Husserl, E. (1970). ''The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology'', Carr, D. (trans.), [[Northwestern University Press]], Evanston.
* {{Cite book | last=Huxley | first=Thomas Henry | title=Hume | authorlink=Thomas Henry Huxley | series=English Men of Letters | volume=39 | publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] | year=2011 | isbn=9781108034777 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=eH67vOxyjEYC | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Huxley | first=Thomas Henry | title=Hume | author-link=Thomas Henry Huxley | series=English Men of Letters | volume=39 | publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] | year=2011 | isbn=978-1-108-03477-7 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=eH67vOxyjEYC }}
* {{cite web | last= Jessop | first= Thomas Edmund | title= David Hume. Scottish philosopher. Significance and influence | date= 5 May 2015 | encyclopedia= [[Encyclopædia Britannica]] | url= http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/276139/David-Hume/12265/Significance-and-influence | ref= harv}}
* {{cite encyclopedia | last= Jessop | first= Thomas Edmund | title= David Hume. Scottish philosopher. Significance and influence | date= 5 May 2015 | encyclopedia= [[Encyclopædia Britannica]] | url= https://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/276139/David-Hume/12265/Significance-and-influence }}
* {{Cite journal | last = Johnson | first = Oliver A. | title = The Mind of David Hume | publisher = [[University of Illinois Press]] | year = 1995 | pages = 8–9 | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite journal | last = Johnson | first = Oliver A. | title = The Mind of David Hume | publisher = [[University of Illinois Press]] | year = 1995 | pages = 8–9 }}
* {{Cite journal | last1 = Kenyon | first1 = John D. | last2 = Craig | first2 = Edward | title = Doubts about the Concept of Reason | journal= Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes | volume=59 | year = 1985 | pages = 249–267 and 269–283 | jstor=4106756 | ref=harv | doi=10.1093/aristoteliansupp/59.1.249}}
* {{Cite journal | last1 = Kenyon | first1 = John D. | last2 = Craig | first2 = Edward | title = Doubts about the Concept of Reason | journal= Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes | volume=59 | year = 1985 | pages = 249–267 and 269–283 | jstor=4106756 | doi=10.1093/aristoteliansupp/59.1.249}}
* {{cite book | last=Kenyon | first=John Philipps |title= The history men: the historical profession in England since the Renaissance | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1LkbAAAAIAAJ | year=1984 | publisher=[[University of Pittsburgh Press]] |page=42|isbn=9780822959007 | ref=harv}}
* {{cite book | last=Kenyon | first=John Philipps | title=The history men: the historical profession in England since the Renaissance | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1LkbAAAAIAAJ | year=1984 | publisher=[[University of Pittsburgh Press]] | page=42 | isbn=978-0-8229-5900-7 }}
* Klibansky, Raymond and Mossner, Ernest C. (eds.) (1954). ''New Letters of David Hume''. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
* Klibansky, Raymond and Mossner, Ernest C. (eds.) (1954). ''New Letters of David Hume''. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
* Kolakowski, L. (1968). ''The Alienation of Reason: A History of Positivist Thought''. Doubleday: Garden City.
* Kolakowski, L. (1968). ''The Alienation of Reason: A History of Positivist Thought''. Doubleday: Garden City.
* {{Cite journal | last = Korsgaard | first = Christine M. | authorlink= Christine Korsgaard | title = Skepticism about Practical Reason | journal= [[The Journal of Philosophy]] | volume=83 | issue=1 |date=January 1996 | pages = 5–25 | jstor=2026464 | ref=harv| doi = 10.2307/2026464 }}
* {{Cite journal | last = Korsgaard | first = Christine M. | author-link= Christine Korsgaard | title = Skepticism about Practical Reason | journal= [[The Journal of Philosophy]] | volume=83 | issue=1 |date=January 1996 | pages = 5–25 | jstor=2026464 | doi = 10.2307/2026464 }}
* {{Cite book | last=Levine | first=Michael | title=Hume and the Problem of Miracles: A Solution | series= Philosophical Studies Series | volume=41 | year= 1989 | publisher = [[Springer Science & Business Media]] | isbn= 9780792300434 | url= https://books.google.com/books?id=fC3-d89f7qoC | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Levine | first=Michael | title=Hume and the Problem of Miracles: A Solution | series=Philosophical Studies Series | volume=41 | year=1989 | publisher=[[Springer Science & Business Media]] | isbn=978-0-7923-0043-4 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=fC3-d89f7qoC }}
* {{Cite book | last=Livingston | first = Donald | authorlink=Donald Livingston | chapter=Foreword | title=David Hume: Prophet of the Counter-revolution | year= 1965 | publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] | chapter-url=https://academic.oup.com/ahr/article-abstract/72/1/201/171086 | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Livingston | first=Donald | author-link=Donald Livingston | chapter=Foreword | title=David Hume: Prophet of the Counter-revolution | year=1965 | publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] | chapter-url=https://academic.oup.com/ahr/article-abstract/72/1/201/171086 }}
* {{Cite book | last=Loeb | first=Louis E. | chapter= Chapter 6. Inductive Inference in Hume's Philosophy | editor-last= Radcliffe | editor-first= Elizabeth S. | year= 2010 | pages=106–125 | title= A Companion to Hume | publisher = [[John Wiley & Sons]] | isbn= 9781444337860 | chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=6ECxW_2tAf0C | doi=10.1002/9780470696583.ch6 | ref= harv}}
* {{Cite book | last= Loeb | first= Louis E. | chapter= Chapter 6. Inductive Inference in Hume's Philosophy | editor-last= Radcliffe | editor-first= Elizabeth S. | year= 2010 | pages= 106–125 | title= A Companion to Hume | publisher= [[John Wiley & Sons]] | isbn= 978-1-4443-3786-0 | chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=6ECxW_2tAf0C | doi= 10.1002/9780470696583.ch6 }}
* {{Cite book | last=MacKie | first=John Leslie | authorlink=J. L. Mackie| title= The Miracle of Theism: Arguments for and Against the Existence of God | publisher = [[Clarendon Press]] | year=1982 | edition=reprinted | isbn= 9780198246824 | url= https://books.google.com/books?id=x0Iv-QkYpjIC | ref= harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=MacKie | first=John Leslie | author-link=J. L. Mackie | title=The Miracle of Theism: Arguments for and Against the Existence of God | publisher=[[Clarendon Press]] | year=1982 | edition=reprinted | isbn=978-0-19-824682-4 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=x0Iv-QkYpjIC }}
* {{Cite book | last=Madden | first=James D. | chapter= Chapter 8. Giving the devil his due | editor1-last= Sennett | editor1-first= James F. | editor2-last= Groothuis | editor2-first= Douglas | editor2-link= Douglas Groothuis | year= 2005 | pages=150–174 | title= In Defense of Natural Theology: A Post-Humean Assessment | publisher = [[InterVarsity Press]] | isbn= 9780830827671 | chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=UKSZeRnuyjAC | ref= harv}}
* {{Cite book | last= Madden | first= James D. | chapter= Chapter 8. Giving the devil his due | editor1-last= Sennett | editor1-first= James F. | editor2-last= Groothuis | editor2-first= Douglas | editor2-link= Douglas Groothuis | year= 2005 | pages= 150–174 | title= In Defense of Natural Theology: A Post-Humean Assessment | publisher= [[InterVarsity Press]] | isbn= 978-0-8308-2767-1 | chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=UKSZeRnuyjAC }}
* {{Cite book | last=Magee | authorlink=Bryan Magee | first=Bryan | title=The Great Philosophers: An Introduction to Western Philosophy | publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] | year=2000 | isbn=9780192893222 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=8WjmtRd5OzgC | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Magee | author-link=Bryan Magee | first=Bryan | title=The Great Philosophers: An Introduction to Western Philosophy | publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] | year=2000 | isbn=978-0-19-289322-2 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=8WjmtRd5OzgC }}
* {{Cite book | last = Martin Orejana | first = Marina | title =Jorge Luis Borges and David Hume: Their Epistemological Approach to the External World and the Self | publisher= [[University of Virginia]] | year = 1991 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=1ntzngEACAAJ | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last = Martin Orejana | first = Marina | title = Jorge Luis Borges and David Hume: Their Epistemological Approach to the External World and the Self | publisher = [[University of Virginia]] | year = 1991 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=1ntzngEACAAJ }}
* {{cite web | last= Maurer | first= The Reverend Armand | title= Western philosophy. Basic Science of Human Nature in Hume | date= 27 May 2013 | encyclopedia= [[Encyclopædia Britannica]] | url= http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/1350843/Western-philosophy/60959/Basic-science-of-human-nature-in-Hume | ref= harv}}
* {{cite encyclopedia | last= Maurer | first= The Reverend Armand | title= Western philosophy. Basic Science of Human Nature in Hume | date= 27 May 2013 | encyclopedia= [[Encyclopædia Britannica]] | url= https://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/1350843/Western-philosophy/60959/Basic-science-of-human-nature-in-Hume }}
* {{Cite book | last=McArthur | first=Neil | title= David Hume's Political Theory: Law, Commerce, and the Constitution of Government | publisher = [[University of Toronto Press]] | year=2007 | isbn= 9780802093356 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=LLq-4rxR5ncC | ref= harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=McArthur | first=Neil | title=David Hume's Political Theory: Law, Commerce, and the Constitution of Government | publisher=[[University of Toronto Press]] | year=2007 | isbn=978-0-8020-9335-6 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=LLq-4rxR5ncC }}
* {{Cite book | last = McDowell | first = John | chapter = Non-cognitivism and rule-following | title= Wittgenstein: To Follow A Rule | series=International Library of Philosophy, Psychology, and Scientific Method | editor1-last= Holtzman | editor1-first= Steven H. | editor2-last= Leich | editor2-first= Christopher M. | publisher = [[Routledge & Kegan Paul]] | year = 1981 | pages = 141–162 | chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Jd89AAAAIAAJ | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last = McDowell | first = John | chapter = Non-cognitivism and rule-following | title = Wittgenstein: To Follow A Rule | series = International Library of Philosophy, Psychology, and Scientific Method | editor1-last = Holtzman | editor1-first = Steven H. | editor2-last = Leich | editor2-first = Christopher M. | publisher = [[Routledge & Kegan Paul]] | year = 1981 | pages = 141–162 | isbn = 978-0-7100-0760-5 | chapter-url = https://books.google.com/books?id=Jd89AAAAIAAJ }}
* {{Cite book | last1= McKenna | first1= Michael | last2= Coates | first2= Justin D. | chapter= Compatibilism | editor-last= Zalta | editor-first= Edward N. | editor-link= Edward Zalta | year= 2015 | title= The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy | chapterurl= http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/compatibilism/#3 | ref= harv| title-link= The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy }}
* {{Cite book | last1= McKenna | first1= Michael | last2= Coates | first2= Justin D. | chapter= Compatibilism | editor-last= Zalta | editor-first= Edward N. | editor-link= Edward Zalta | year= 2015 | title= The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy | chapter-url= http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/compatibilism/#3 | title-link= The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy | publisher= Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University }}
* {{Cite book | last=Millican | first=Peter | title=Hume, Induction and Probability | authorlink=Peter Millican | publisher=[[University of Leeds]] | year=1996 | url=http://www.davidhume.org/papers/millican/1996PhD.pdf | ref=harv | access-date=6 June 2014 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171020020313/http://www.davidhume.org/papers/millican/1996PhD.pdf | archive-date=20 October 2017 | url-status=dead }}
* {{Cite book | last=Millican | first=Peter | title=Hume, Induction and Probability | author-link=Peter Millican | publisher=[[University of Leeds]] | year=1996 | url=http://www.davidhume.org/papers/millican/1996PhD.pdf | access-date=6 June 2014 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171020020313/http://www.davidhume.org/papers/millican/1996PhD.pdf | archive-date=20 October 2017 | url-status=dead }}
* {{Cite book | last1= Morris | first1= William Edward | last2= Brown | first2= Charlotte R. | chapter= David Hume | editor-last= Zalta | editor-first= Edward N. | editor-link= Edward Zalta | year= 2011 | title= The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy | chapterurl= http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2011/entries/hume/ | ref= harv| title-link= The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy }}
* {{Cite book | last1= Morris | first1= William Edward | last2= Brown | first2= Charlotte R. | chapter= David Hume | editor-last= Zalta | editor-first= Edward N. | editor-link= Edward Zalta | year= 2011 | title= The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy | chapter-url= http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2011/entries/hume/ | title-link= The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy | publisher= Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University }}
* {{Cite journal | last = Mossner | first = Ernest Campbell | authorlink = Ernest Campbell Mossner | title = Hume at La Flèche, 1735: an unpublished letter | journal = Studies in English | volume = 37 | pages = 30–33 | year=1958 | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite journal | last = Mossner | first = Ernest Campbell | author-link = Ernest Campbell Mossner | title = Hume at La Flèche, 1735: an unpublished letter | journal = Studies in English | volume = 37 | pages = 30–33 | year=1958 }}
* {{Cite journal | last= Mossner | first= Ernest Campbell | authorlink= Ernest Campbell Mossner | title= Philosophy and Biography: The Case of David Hume | journal= The Philosophical Review | volume= 59 | issue= 2 | pages= 184–201 | year= 1950 | doi= 10.2307/2181501 | jstor=2181501 | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite journal | last= Mossner | first= Ernest Campbell | author-link= Ernest Campbell Mossner | title= Philosophy and Biography: The Case of David Hume | journal= The Philosophical Review | volume= 59 | issue= 2 | pages= 184–201 | year= 1950 | doi= 10.2307/2181501 | jstor=2181501 }}
* {{Cite book | last= Mossner | first= Ernest Campbell | authorlink= Ernest Campbell Mossner | title= The Life of David Hume | publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] | year= 1980 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=7HXJAqqNl4QC | ref=harv| isbn= 9780199243365 }}
* {{Cite book | last= Mossner | first= Ernest Campbell | author-link= Ernest Campbell Mossner | title= The Life of David Hume | publisher= [[Oxford University Press]] | year= 1980 | url= https://books.google.com/books?id=7HXJAqqNl4QC | isbn= 978-0-19-924336-5 }}
* {{Cite book | last1= Mounce | first1= Howard | last2= Mounce | first2= H.O. | title= Hume's Naturalism | publisher=[[Routledge]] | year= 2002 | isbn= 9781134654468 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=qyepEVWo0v8C | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last1= Mounce | first1= Howard | last2= Mounce | first2= H.O. | title= Hume's Naturalism | publisher= [[Routledge]] | year= 2002 | isbn= 978-1-134-65446-8 | url= https://books.google.com/books?id=qyepEVWo0v8C }}
* {{Cite journal | last = Nobbs | first = Douglas | title = The Political Ideas of William Cleghorn, Hume's Academic Rival | journal = [[Journal of the History of Ideas]] | year = 1965 | volume = 26 | pages = 575–586 | issue = 4 | jstor = 2708501 | doi = 10.2307/2708501 | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite journal | last = Nobbs | first = Douglas | title = The Political Ideas of William Cleghorn, Hume's Academic Rival | journal = [[Journal of the History of Ideas]] | year = 1965 | volume = 26 | pages = 575–586 | issue = 4 | jstor = 2708501 | doi = 10.2307/2708501 }}
* {{Cite book | last= Norton | first= David Fate | chapter= Introduction to Hume's thought | editor-last= Norton | editor-first= David Fate | year= 1993 | pages=1–32 | title= The Cambridge Companion to Hume | publisher = [[Cambridge University Press]] | isbn= 9780521387101 | chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=vv5ERpFQBCoC | ref= harv}}
* {{Cite book | last= Norton | first= David Fate | chapter= Introduction to Hume's thought | editor-last= Norton | editor-first= David Fate | year= 1993 | pages= 1–32 | title= The Cambridge Companion to Hume | publisher= [[Cambridge University Press]] | isbn= 978-0-521-38710-1 | chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=vv5ERpFQBCoC }}
* {{Cite book | last = O'Connor | first = David | title =Routledge Philosophy GuideBook to Hume on Religion | series = Routledge Philosophy GuideBooks | publisher= [[Routledge]] | year = 2013 | isbn = 9781134634095 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=ntygPAezQJUC | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last = O'Connor | first = David | title = Routledge Philosophy GuideBook to Hume on Religion | series = Routledge Philosophy GuideBooks | publisher = [[Routledge]] | year = 2013 | isbn = 978-1-134-63409-5 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=ntygPAezQJUC }}
* {{Cite journal | last = Okie | first = Laird | title = Ideology and Partiality in David Hume's History of England | journal = [[Hume Studies]] | year = 1985 | volume = 11 | pages = 1–32 | issue = 1 | url = http://www.humesociety.org/hs/issues/v11n1/okie/okie-v11n1.pdf | ref = harv | doi = 10.1353/hms.2011.0052 | access-date = 8 July 2013 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20141208124831/http://www.humesociety.org/hs/issues/v11n1/okie/okie-v11n1.pdf | archive-date = 8 December 2014 | url-status = dead }}
* {{Cite journal | last = Okie | first = Laird | title = Ideology and Partiality in David Hume's History of England | journal = [[Hume Studies]] | year = 1985 | volume = 11 | pages = 1–32 | issue = 1 | url = http://www.humesociety.org/hs/issues/v11n1/okie/okie-v11n1.pdf | doi = 10.1353/hms.2011.0052 | s2cid = 170693611 | access-date = 8 July 2013 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20141208124831/http://www.humesociety.org/hs/issues/v11n1/okie/okie-v11n1.pdf | archive-date = 8 December 2014 | url-status = dead }}
* {{Cite book | last=Parfit | first=Derek | title=Reasons and Persons | authorlink=Derek Parfit | publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] | year=1984 | isbn= 9780191622441 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=i5wQaJI3668C | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Parfit | first=Derek | title=Reasons and Persons | author-link=Derek Parfit | publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] | year=1984 | isbn=978-0-19-162244-1 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=i5wQaJI3668C }}
* {{Cite book | last=Passmore | first=John A. | title=Hume's Intentions | publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] | year=2013 | isbn= 9781107697867 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=vZRtAAAAQBAJ | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Passmore | first=John A. | title=Hume's Intentions | publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] | year=2013 | isbn=978-1-107-69786-7 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=vZRtAAAAQBAJ }}
* Penelhum, T. (1993). ''Hume's moral philosophy''. In Norton, D. F. (ed.), (1993). ''The Cambridge Companion to Hume'', Cambridge University Press, pp.&nbsp;117–147.
* Penelhum, T. (1993). ''Hume's moral philosophy''. In Norton, D. F. (ed.), (1993). ''The Cambridge Companion to Hume'', Cambridge University Press, pp.&nbsp;117–147.
* Phillipson, N. (1989). ''Hume'', Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London.
* Phillipson, N. (1989). ''Hume'', Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London.
* {{Cite book | last=Phillipson | first=Nicholas | title=David Hume: The Philosopher As Historian|year=2012 | publisher=Yale University Press|location=New Haven | isbn=978-0-300-18166-1 | url=https://books.google.com/?id=1BmA-cONPngC | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Phillipson | first=Nicholas | title=David Hume: The Philosopher As Historian | year=2012 | publisher=Yale University Press | location=New Haven | isbn=978-0-300-18166-1 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1BmA-cONPngC }}
* {{cite web | last= Popkin | first= Richard H. | title= Skepticism. The 18th century | date= 3 December 2014 | encyclopedia= [[Encyclopædia Britannica]] | url= http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/547424/skepticism/68421/The-18th-century | ref= harv}}
* {{cite encyclopedia | last= Popkin | first= Richard H. | title= Skepticism. The 18th century | date= 3 December 2014 | encyclopedia= [[Encyclopædia Britannica]] | url= https://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/547424/skepticism/68421/The-18th-century }}
* Popkin, Richard H. (1993) "Sources of Knowledge of Sextus Empiricus in Hume's Time" Journal ''of the History of Ideas'', Vol. 54, No. 1. (Jan. 1993), pp.&nbsp;137–141.
* Popkin, Richard H. (1993) "Sources of Knowledge of Sextus Empiricus in Hume's Time" Journal ''of the History of Ideas'', Vol. 54, No. 1. (Jan. 1993), pp.&nbsp;137–141.
* Popkin, R. & Stroll, A. (1993) ''Philosophy''. Reed Educational and Professional Publishing Ltd, Oxford.
* Popkin, R. & Stroll, A. (1993) ''Philosophy''. Reed Educational and Professional Publishing Ltd, Oxford.
* Popper. K. (1960). ''Knowledge without authority''. In Miller D. (ed.), (1983). ''Popper'', Oxford, Fontana, pp.&nbsp;46–57.
* Popper. K. (1960). ''Knowledge without authority''. In Miller D. (ed.), (1983). ''Popper'', Oxford, Fontana, pp.&nbsp;46–57.
* {{Cite book | last= Prasad | first= Rajendra | chapter= Reactive Attitudes, Rationality and Determinism | pages=346–376 | editor1-last= Sen | editor1-first= Pranab Kumar | editor2-last= Verma | editor2-first= Roop Rekha | year = 1995 | title= The Philosophy of P.F. Strawson | publisher = [[Allied Publishers]] | chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=66b8FJmZQ38C | isbn= 9788185636160 | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last= Prasad | first= Rajendra | chapter= Reactive Attitudes, Rationality and Determinism | pages= 346–376 | editor1-last= Sen | editor1-first= Pranab Kumar | editor2-last= Verma | editor2-first= Roop Rekha | year= 1995 | title= The Philosophy of P.F. Strawson | publisher= Allied Publishers | chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=66b8FJmZQ38C | isbn= 978-81-85636-16-0 }}
* {{Cite book | title=The New Hume Debate | editor1-last=Read | editor1-first=Rupert | editor2-last=Richman | editor2-first=Kenneth | publisher=[[Routledge]] | year=2002 | isbn=978-1-134-55528-4 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=CaWCAgAAQBAJ }}
* {{Cite book
|title=The New Hume Debate | editor1-last=Read | editor1-first=Rupert | editor2-last=Richman | editor2-first=Kenneth | publisher=[[Routledge]] | year=2002 | isbn= 9781134555284 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=CaWCAgAAQBAJ | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Redman | first=Deborah A. | title=The Rise of Political Economy as a Science: Methodology and the Classical Economists | publisher=[[Massachusetts Institute of Technology]] | year=1997 | isbn=978-0-262-26425-9 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1faeMedY8k8C }}
* {{cite web | title = Arguments for the existence of God. The design (or teleological) argument | publisher = Religiouseducation.co.uk | access-date = 22 April 2015 | url = http://www.religiouseducation.co.uk/school/alevel/philosophy/Britannica_com.htm | ref = {{harvid|RE}} | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20150414134459/http://www.religiouseducation.co.uk/school/alevel/philosophy/Britannica_com.htm | archive-date = 14 April 2015 | url-status = dead }}
* {{Cite book | last=Redman | first=Deborah A. | title=The Rise of Political Economy as a Science: Methodology and the Classical Economists | publisher=[[Massachusetts Institute of Technology]] | year=1997 | isbn= 9780262264259 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1faeMedY8k8C | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Rivers | first=Isabel | title=Reason, Grace, and Sentiment: Volume 2, Shaftesbury to Hume: A Study of the Language of Religion and Ethics in England, 1660–1780 | series=Cambridge Studies in Eighteenth-Century English Literature and Thought | volume=37 | publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] | year=2000 | isbn=978-1-139-42500-1 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1faeMedY8k8C }}
* {{cite web | title= Arguments for the existence of God. The design (or teleological) argument | publisher = Religiouseducation.co.uk | accessdate = 22 April 2015| url = http://www.religiouseducation.co.uk/school/alevel/philosophy/Britannica_com.htm | ref = {{harvid|RE}}}}
* {{Cite book | last=Rivers | first=Isabel | title=Reason, Grace, and Sentiment: Volume 2, Shaftesbury to Hume: A Study of the Language of Religion and Ethics in England, 1660–1780 | series=Cambridge Studies in Eighteenth-Century English Literature and Thought | volume=37 | publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] | year=2000 | isbn= 9781139425001 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1faeMedY8k8C | ref=harv}}
* Robbins, Lionel (1998). ''A History of Economic Thought: The LSE Lectures''. Edited by Steven G. Medema and Warren J. Samuels. [[Princeton University Press]], Princeton, NJ.
* Robbins, Lionel (1998). ''A History of Economic Thought: The LSE Lectures''. Edited by Steven G. Medema and Warren J. Samuels. [[Princeton University Press]], Princeton, NJ.
* Robinson, Dave & Groves, Judy (2003). ''Introducing Political Philosophy''. Icon Books. {{ISBN|1-84046-450-X}}.
* Robinson, Dave & Groves, Judy (2003). ''Introducing Political Philosophy''. Icon Books. {{ISBN|978-1-84046-450-4}}.
* {{cite journal | last = Roth | first = Robert J. | year = 1991 | title = David Hume on Religion in England | url = http://www.pdcnet.org/pdc/bvdb.nsf/purchase?openform&fp=thought&id=thought_1991_0066_0001_0051_0064 | journal = [[Thought: Fordham University Quarterly]] | volume = 66 | issue = 260 | pages = 51–64 | doi=10.5840/thought199166142 | ref=harv}}
* {{cite journal | last = Roth | first = Robert J. | year = 1991 | title = David Hume on Religion in England | url = http://www.pdcnet.org/pdc/bvdb.nsf/purchase?openform&fp=thought&id=thought_1991_0066_0001_0051_0064 | journal = [[Thought: Fordham University Quarterly]] | volume = 66 | issue = 260 | pages = 51–64 | doi = 10.5840/thought199166142 }}
* Russell, B. (1946). ''A History of Western Philosophy''. London, Allen and Unwin.
* Russell, B. (1946). ''A History of Western Philosophy''. London, Allen and Unwin.
* {{Cite book | last= Russell | first= Paul | authorlink=Paul Russell (philosopher) | title= Freedom and Moral Sentiment: Hume's Way of Naturalizing Responsibility| publisher= [[Oxford University Press]] | year=1995 | isbn= 9780195095012 | ref= harv}}
* {{Cite book | last= Russell | first= Paul | author-link=Paul Russell (philosopher) | title= Freedom and Moral Sentiment: Hume's Way of Naturalizing Responsibility| publisher= [[Oxford University Press]] | year=1995 | isbn= 978-0-19-509501-2 }}
* {{Cite book | last= Russell | first= Paul | authorlink=Paul Russell (philosopher) | chapter= Hume on Religion | editor-last= Zalta | editor-first= Edward N. | editor-link= Edward Zalta | year= 2014 | title= The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy | chapterurl= http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hume-religion/ | ref= harv| title-link= The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy }}
* {{Cite book | last= Russell | first= Paul | author-link= Paul Russell (philosopher) | chapter= Hume on Religion | editor-last= Zalta | editor-first= Edward N. | editor-link= Edward Zalta | year= 2014 | title= The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy | chapter-url= http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hume-religion/ | title-link= The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy | publisher= Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University }}
* Russell, Paul, "Hume on Free Will", ''The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy'' (Winter 2016 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), [https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/hume-freewill/ online].
* Russell, Paul, "Hume on Free Will", ''The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy'' (Winter 2016 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), [https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/hume-freewill/ online].
* {{Cite book | last= Russell | first= Paul | authorlink=Paul Russell (philosopher) | title= The Riddle of Hume's Treatise: Skepticism, Naturalism, and Irreligion | publisher= [[Oxford University Press]] | year=2008 | isbn= 9780199751525 | ref= harv}}
* {{Cite book | last= Russell | first= Paul | author-link=Paul Russell (philosopher) | title= The Riddle of Hume's Treatise: Skepticism, Naturalism, and Irreligion | publisher= [[Oxford University Press]] | year=2008 | isbn= 978-0-19-975152-5 }}
* {{Cite book | last= Scharfstein| first= Ben-Ami | title= A Comparative History of World Philosophy: From the Upanishads to Kant | series=EBSCO eBook Collection | publisher= [[SUNY Press]] | year=1998 | isbn= 9780791436837 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=iZQy2lu70bwC | ref= harv}}
* {{Cite book | last= Scharfstein | first= Ben-Ami | title= A Comparative History of World Philosophy: From the Upanishads to Kant | series= EBSCO eBook Collection | publisher= [[SUNY Press]] | year= 1998 | isbn= 978-0-7914-3683-7 | url= https://books.google.com/books?id=iZQy2lu70bwC }}
* {{Cite book | last=Schmidt | first=Claudia M. | title=David Hume: Reason in History | publisher=[[Penn State Press]] | year=2010 | isbn= 9780271046976 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZSXlNY6xIMoC | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Schmidt | first=Claudia M. | title=David Hume: Reason in History | publisher=[[Penn State Press]] | year=2010 | isbn=978-0-271-04697-6 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZSXlNY6xIMoC }}
* {{cite web | last= Scruton | first= Roger |author-link=Roger Scruton| title= Aesthetics: Major concerns of 18th-century aesthetics | date= 14 December 2014 | encyclopedia= [[Encyclopædia Britannica]] | url= http://www.britannica.com/topic/aesthetics/Taste-criticism-and-judgment#toc11686 | ref= harv}}
* {{cite encyclopedia | last= Scruton | first= Roger | author-link= Roger Scruton | title= Aesthetics: Major concerns of 18th-century aesthetics | date= 14 December 2014 | encyclopedia= [[Encyclopædia Britannica]] | url= https://www.britannica.com/topic/aesthetics/Taste-criticism-and-judgment#toc11686 }}
* [[Marco Sgarbi|Sgarbi, M.]] [https://www.academia.edu/2422259/_Hume_s_Source_of_the_Impression-Idea_Distinction_Anales_del_Seminario_de_Historia_de_la_Filosof%C3%ADa_2_2012_561_576 (2012). "Hume's Source of the 'Impression-Idea' Distinction", Anales del Seminario de Historia de la Filosofía, 2: 561–576]
* [[Marco Sgarbi|Sgarbi, M.]] [https://www.academia.edu/2422259/_Hume_s_Source_of_the_Impression-Idea_Distinction_Anales_del_Seminario_de_Historia_de_la_Filosof%C3%ADa_2_2012_561_576 (2012). "Hume's Source of the 'Impression-Idea' Distinction", Anales del Seminario de Historia de la Filosofía, 2: 561–576]
* {{Cite book | last=Sher | first=Richard B. | title=The Enlightenment and the Book: Scottish Authors and Their Publishers in Eighteenth-Century Britain, Ireland, and America | series=Chicago Studies in Ethnomusicology Series | publisher=[[University of Chicago Press]] | year=2008 | isbn= 9780226752549 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=gB9liJb5o7UC | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Sher | first=Richard B. | title=The Enlightenment and the Book: Scottish Authors and Their Publishers in Eighteenth-Century Britain, Ireland, and America | series=Chicago Studies in Ethnomusicology Series | publisher=[[University of Chicago Press]] | year=2008 | isbn=978-0-226-75254-9 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=gB9liJb5o7UC }}
* {{cite web | last= Singer | first= Peter | authorlink=Peter Singer | title= The climax of moral sense theory: Hutcheson and Hume | date= 4 March 2015 | encyclopedia= [[Encyclopædia Britannica]] | url= http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/194023/ethics/252540/The-climax-of-moral-sense-theory-Hutcheson-and-Hume | ref= harv}}
* {{cite encyclopedia | last= Singer | first= Peter | author-link= Peter Singer | title= The climax of moral sense theory: Hutcheson and Hume | date= 4 March 2015 | encyclopedia= [[Encyclopædia Britannica]] | url= https://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/194023/ethics/252540/The-climax-of-moral-sense-theory-Hutcheson-and-Hume }}
* {{Cite journal | last=Smith | first=Michael Andrew | authorlink=Michael A. Smith | title=The Humean Theory of Motivation | journal=[[Mind (journal)|Mind]] | volume=96 | issue=381 | edition=New Series |date=January 1987 | pages=36–61 | doi=10.1093/mind/XCVI.381.36 | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite journal | last=Smith | first=Michael Andrew | author-link=Michael A. Smith (philosopher) | title=The Humean Theory of Motivation | journal=[[Mind (journal)|Mind]] | volume=96 | issue=381 | edition=New Series |date=January 1987 | pages=36–61 | doi=10.1093/mind/XCVI.381.36 }}
* Spencer, Mark G., ed. ''David Hume: Historical Thinker, Historical Writer'' (Penn State University Press; 2013) 282 pages; Interdisciplinary essays that consider his intertwined work as historian and philosopher
* [[Spencer, Mark G.]], ed. ''David Hume: Historical Thinker, Historical Writer'' (Penn State University Press; 2013) 282 pages; Interdisciplinary essays that consider his intertwined work as historian and philosopher
* Spiegel, Henry William, (1991). ''The Growth of Economic Thought'', 3rd Ed., Durham: [[Duke University Press]].
* Spiegel, Henry William, (1991). ''The Growth of Economic Thought'', 3rd Ed., Durham: [[Duke University Press]].
* {{Cite book | last= Strawson | first= Galen | authorlink= Galen Strawson | title=The Evident Connexion: Hume on Personal Identity | publisher=Oxford Scholarship Online | year=2011 | isbn= 9780199608508 | url=http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608508.001.0001/acprof-9780199608508 | doi=10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608508.001.0001 | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Strawson | first=Galen | author-link=Galen Strawson | title=The Evident Connexion: Hume on Personal Identity | publisher=Oxford Scholarship Online | year=2011 | isbn=978-0-19-960850-8 | url=http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608508.001.0001/acprof-9780199608508 | doi=10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199608508.001.0001 }}
* {{Cite book | last= Strawson | first= Galen | authorlink= Galen Strawson | title=The Secret Connexion: Causation, Realism, and David Hume | series=Chicago Studies in Ethnomusicology Series | publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] | year=2014 | isbn= 9780199605859 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=htRFAwAAQBAJ | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Strawson | first=Galen | author-link=Galen Strawson | title=The Secret Connexion: Causation, Realism, and David Hume | series=Chicago Studies in Ethnomusicology Series | publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] | year=2014 | isbn=978-0-19-960585-9 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=htRFAwAAQBAJ }}
* {{Cite book | last= Strawson | first= Sir Peter Frederick | authorlink=P. F. Strawson | title=Freedom and Resentment and Other Essays | publisher=[[Routledge]] | year=2008 | isbn= 9781134060870 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=S4R8AgAAQBAJ | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Strawson | first=Sir Peter Frederick | author-link=P. F. Strawson | title=Freedom and Resentment and Other Essays | publisher=[[Routledge]] | year=2008 | isbn=978-1-134-06087-0 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=S4R8AgAAQBAJ }}
* Stroud, B. (1977). ''Hume'', Routledge: London & New York.
* Stroud, B. (1977). ''Hume'', Routledge: London & New York.
* {{Cite book | last= Swain | first= Corliss Gaida | chapter= Personal Identity | editor-last= Traiger | editor-first= Saul | year = 2008 | title= The Blackwell Guide to Hume's Treatise | series=Blackwell Guides to Great Works | publisher = [[John Wiley & Sons]] | chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Qoh7_nZbBjYC | isbn= 9781405153133 | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last= Swain | first= Corliss Gaida | chapter= Personal Identity | editor-last= Traiger | editor-first= Saul | year= 2008 | title= The Blackwell Guide to Hume's Treatise | series= Blackwell Guides to Great Works | publisher= [[John Wiley & Sons]] | chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=Qoh7_nZbBjYC | isbn= 978-1-4051-5313-3 }}
* Taylor, A. E. (1927). ''David Hume and the Miraculous'', Leslie Stephen Lecture. Cambridge, pp.&nbsp;53–54.
* Taylor, A. E. (1927). ''David Hume and the Miraculous'', Leslie Stephen Lecture. Cambridge, pp.&nbsp;53–54. reprinted in his ''[[iarchive:in.ernet.dli.2015.222686/page/n340/mode/1up|Philosophical Studies]]'' (1934)
* {{Cite book | last= Taylor | first= W. L. | title=Francis Hutcheson and David Hume as Predecessors of Adam Smith | publisher=[[Duke University Press]] | place=Durham, NC| year=1965 | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last= Taylor | first= W. L. | title=Francis Hutcheson and David Hume as Predecessors of Adam Smith | publisher=[[Duke University Press]] | place=Durham, NC| year=1965 }}
* {{Cite book | last= Waldmann | first= Felix | title=Further Letters of David Hume | publisher=Edinburgh Bibliographical Society | place=Edinburgh | year=2014 | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last= Waldmann | first= Felix | title=Further Letters of David Hume | publisher=Edinburgh Bibliographical Society | place=Edinburgh | year=2014 }}
* {{Cite journal | last= Wertz | first=S. K. | title=Hume, History, and Human Nature | journal=[[Journal of the History of Ideas]] | volume=36 | issue=3 | year= 1975 | pages=481–496 | jstor=2708658 | doi=10.2307/2708658 | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite journal | last= Wertz | first=S. K. | title=Hume, History, and Human Nature | journal=[[Journal of the History of Ideas]] | volume=36 | issue=3 | year= 1975 | pages=481–496 | jstor=2708658 | doi=10.2307/2708658 }}
* {{Cite journal | last = Wertz | first=S. K. | year = 1993 | title = Hume and the Historiography of Science | jstor = 2710021 | journal = [[Journal of the History of Ideas]] | volume = 54 | issue = 3| pages = 411–436 | doi=10.2307/2710021 | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite journal | last = Wertz | first=S. K. | year = 1993 | title = Hume and the Historiography of Science | jstor = 2710021 | journal = [[Journal of the History of Ideas]] | volume = 54 | issue = 3| pages = 411–436 | doi=10.2307/2710021 }}
* {{Cite book | last=Wiley | first=James | title=Theory and Practice in the Philosophy of David Hume | publisher=[[Palgrave Macmillan]] | year=2012 | isbn= 9781137026439 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Q94tuawjdYUC | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Wiley | first=James | title=Theory and Practice in the Philosophy of David Hume | publisher=[[Palgrave Macmillan]] | year=2012 | isbn=978-1-137-02643-9 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Q94tuawjdYUC }}
* {{Cite book | last=Wright | first=John P. | title=Hume's 'A Treatise of Human Nature': An Introduction | publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] | series=Cambridge Introductions to Key Philosophical Texts | year=2009 | isbn= 9780521833769 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=tgm8yY6-eGkC | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Wright | first=John P. | title=Hume's 'A Treatise of Human Nature': An Introduction | publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] | series=Cambridge Introductions to Key Philosophical Texts | year=2009 | isbn=978-0-521-83376-9 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=tgm8yY6-eGkC }}
* {{Cite book | last=Wright | first=John P. | title=The Sceptical Realism of David Hume | series=Studies in intellectual history and the history of philosophy | publisher=[[Manchester University Press]] | year=1983 | isbn= 9780719008825 | url=https://archive.org/details/scepticalrealism0000wrig | url-access=registration | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Wright | first=John P. | title=The Sceptical Realism of David Hume | series=Studies in intellectual history and the history of philosophy | publisher=[[Manchester University Press]] | year=1983 | isbn=978-0-7190-0882-5 | url=https://archive.org/details/scepticalrealism0000wrig | url-access=registration }}
* {{Cite book | last=Wright | first= Richard | title=Understanding Religious Ethics: A Complete Guide for OCR AS and A2 | series=Studies in intellectual history and the history of philosophy | publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] | year= 2010 | ref=harv}}
* {{Cite book | last=Wright | first= Richard | title=Understanding Religious Ethics: A Complete Guide for OCR AS and A2 | series=Studies in intellectual history and the history of philosophy | publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] | year= 2010 }}
{{refend}}
{{refend}}


==Further reading==
== Further reading ==
{{Library resources box|by=yes||onlinebooks=yes|viaf=49226972}}
{{refbegin|2}}
{{refbegin|30em}}
* {{Cite EB1911|wstitle= Hume, David | volume= 13 |last1= Adamson |first1= Robert |author1-link= Robert Adamson (philosopher) |last2= Mitchell |first2= John Malcolm |author2-link= |pages = 876&ndash;884|short=1}}
* Ardal, Pall (1966). ''Passion and Value in Hume's Treatise'', Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press.
* Ardal, Pall (1966). ''Passion and Value in Hume's Treatise'', Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press.
* Bailey, Alan & O'Brien, Dan (eds.) (2012). ''The Continuum Companion to Hume'', New York: Continuum.
* Bailey, Alan & O'Brien, Dan (eds.) (2012). ''The Continuum Companion to Hume'', New York: Continuum.
* Bailey, Alan & O'Brien, Dan. (2014). ''Hume's Critique of Religion: Sick Men's Dreams'', Dordrecht: Springer.
* Bailey, Alan & O'Brien, Dan. (2014). ''Hume's Critique of Religion: Sick Men's Dreams'', Dordrecht: Springer.
* [[Tom Beauchamp|Beauchamp, Tom]] & [[Alexander Rosenberg|Rosenberg, Alexander]] (1981). ''[[Hume and the Problem of Causation]]'', New York, Oxford University Press.
* [[Tom Beauchamp|Beauchamp, Tom]] & [[Alexander Rosenberg|Rosenberg, Alexander]] (1981). ''[[Hume and the Problem of Causation]]'', New York, Oxford University Press.
* Beveridge, Craig (1982), review of ''The Life of David Hume'' by [[Ernest Campbell Mossner]], in Murray, Glen (ed.), ''[[Cencrastus]]'' No. 8, Spring 1982, p.&nbsp;46, {{issn|0264-0856}}
* [[Ernest Campbell Mossner|Campbell Mossner, Ernest]] (1980). ''The Life of David Hume'', Oxford University Press.
* [[Ernest Campbell Mossner|Campbell Mossner, Ernest]] (1980). ''The Life of David Hume'', Oxford University Press.
* [[Gilles Deleuze]] (1953). ''Empirisme et subjectivité. Essai sur la Nature Humaine selon Hume'', Paris: Presses Universitaires de France; trans. ''Empiricism and Subjectivity'', New York: Columbia University Press, 1991.
* [[Gilles Deleuze]] (1953). ''Empirisme et subjectivité. Essai sur la Nature Humaine selon Hume'', Paris: Presses Universitaires de France; trans. ''Empiricism and Subjectivity'', New York: Columbia University Press, 1991.
* {{cite journal|last=Demeter|first=Tamás|title=Hume's Experimental Method|journal=British Journal for the History of Philosophy|year=2012|volume=20|issue=3|page=577|doi=10.1080/09608788.2012.670842|hdl=11858/00-001M-0000-002A-7F3A-B|hdl-access=free}}
* {{cite journal|last=Demeter|first=Tamás|title=Hume's Experimental Method|journal=British Journal for the History of Philosophy|year=2012|volume=20|issue=3|page=577|doi=10.1080/09608788.2012.670842|hdl=11858/00-001M-0000-002A-7F3A-B|s2cid=170120193|hdl-access=free}}
* Demeter, Tamás (2014). "Natural Theology as Superstition: Hume and the Changing Ideology of Moral Inquiry." In Demeter, T. et al. (eds.), ''Conflicting Values of Inquiry'', Leiden: Brill.
* Demeter, Tamás (2014). "Natural Theology as Superstition: Hume and the Changing Ideology of Moral Inquiry." In Demeter, T. et al. (eds.), ''Conflicting Values of Inquiry'', Leiden: Brill.
* Garrett, Don (1996). ''Cognition and Commitment in Hume's Philosophy''. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press.
* Garrett, Don (1996). ''Cognition and Commitment in Hume's Philosophy''. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Line 547: Line 618:
* Kail, P. J. E. (2007) ''Projection and Realism in Hume's Philosophy'', Oxford: Oxford University Press.
* Kail, P. J. E. (2007) ''Projection and Realism in Hume's Philosophy'', Oxford: Oxford University Press.
* [[Norman Kemp Smith|Kemp Smith, Norman]] (1941). ''The Philosophy of David Hume''. London: Macmillan.
* [[Norman Kemp Smith|Kemp Smith, Norman]] (1941). ''The Philosophy of David Hume''. London: Macmillan.
* {{cite encyclopedia |last1=Narveson|first1= Jan|author1-link=Jan Narveson|last2=Trenchard|first2=David|title= Nozick, Robert (1938–2002)|editor-first=Ronald |editor-last=Hamowy |editor-link=Ronald Hamowy |encyclopedia=The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism |chapter= Hume, David (1711–1776) |chapter-url=https://sk.sagepub.com/reference/libertarianism/n142.xml |year=2008 |publisher= [[SAGE Publications|SAGE]]; [[Cato Institute]] |location= Thousand Oaks, CA |doi=10.4135/9781412965811.n220 |isbn= 978-1412965804 <!-- |oclc=750831024 --><!-- | lccn = 2008009151 --> |pages=230–231}}
* Norton, David Fate (1982). ''David Hume: Common-Sense Moralist, Sceptical Metaphysician''. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
* Norton, David Fate (1982). ''David Hume: Common-Sense Moralist, Sceptical Metaphysician''. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
* Norton, David Fate & Taylor, Jacqueline (eds.) (2009). ''The Cambridge Companion to Hume'', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
* Norton, David Fate & Taylor, Jacqueline (eds.) (2009). ''The Cambridge Companion to Hume'', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
* Radcliffe, Elizabeth S. (ed.) (2008). ''A Companion to Hume'', Malden: Blackwell.
* Radcliffe, Elizabeth S. (ed.) (2008). ''A Companion to Hume'', Malden: Blackwell.
* Rosen, Frederick (2003). ''Classical Utilitarianism from Hume to Mill'' (Routledge Studies in Ethics & Moral Theory). {{ISBN|0-415-22094-7}}
* Rosen, Frederick (2003). ''Classical Utilitarianism from Hume to Mill'' (Routledge Studies in Ethics & Moral Theory). {{ISBN|978-0-415-22094-1}}
* [[Paul Russell (philosopher)|Russell, Paul]] (1995). ''Freedom and Moral Sentiment: Hume's Way of Naturalizing Responsibility''. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press.
* [[Paul Russell (philosopher)|Russell, Paul]] (1995). ''Freedom and Moral Sentiment: Hume's Way of Naturalizing Responsibility''. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press.
* [[Paul Russell (philosopher)|Russell, Paul]] (2008). ''The Riddle of Hume's Treatise: Skepticism, Naturalism and Irreligion''. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press.
* [[Paul Russell (philosopher)|Russell, Paul]] (2008). ''The Riddle of Hume's Treatise: Skepticism, Naturalism and Irreligion''. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press.
* [[Barry Stroud|Stroud, Barry]] (1977). ''Hume'', London & New York: Routledge. (Complete study of Hume's work parting from the interpretation of Hume's naturalistic philosophical programme).
* [[Barry Stroud|Stroud, Barry]] (1977). ''Hume'', London & New York: Routledge. (Complete study of Hume's work parting from the interpretation of Hume's naturalistic philosophical programme).
* Wei, Jua (2017). ''Commerce and Politics in Hume’s History of England'', Woodbridge: Boydell and Brewer [http://eh.net/?s=Hume+wei online review]
* Wei, Jua (2017). ''Commerce and Politics in Hume’s History of England'', Woodbridge: Boydell and Brewer [http://eh.net/?s=Hume+wei online review]
* Wilson, Fred (2008). ''The External World and Our Knowledge Of It : Hume's critical realism, an exposition and a defence'', Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
* Willis, Andre C (2015). ''Toward a Humean True Religion: Genuine Theism, Moderate Hope, and Practical Morality'', University Park: Penn State University Press.
* Wilson, Fred (2008). ''The External World and Our Knowledge of It : Hume's critical realism, an exposition and a defence'', Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
{{refend}}
{{refend}}


==External links==
== External links ==
{{Commons category}}
{{Library resources box|by=yes||onlinebooks=yes|viaf=49226972}}
{{Wikisource}}
* {{Commons category-inline}}
{{Wikiquote}}
* {{Wikisource author-inline}}
* {{StandardEbooks|Standard Ebooks URL=https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/david-hume}}
* {{Wikiquote-inline}}
* {{Gutenberg author |id=1440| name=David Hume}}
* [http://www.humesociety.org/ The Hume Society] scholarly organization holds conferences and publishes ''Hume Studies''
* {{Librivox author |id=70}}
* [http://www.davidhume.org Hume Texts Online (davidhume.org)] All of Hume's philosophical works in authoritative searchable editions, with related resources (including articles, bibliography, and the original manuscript of the ''Dialogues'')
* [http://digital.library.mcgill.ca/hume/ The David Hume Collection] at McGill University Library
* [http://digital.library.mcgill.ca/hume/ The David Hume Collection] at McGill University Library
* {{Gutenberg author |id=Hume,+David | name=David Hume}}
* {{Internet Archive author |sname=David Hume}}
* {{Internet Archive author |sname=David Hume}}
* {{Librivox author |id=70}}
* [http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/search?amode=start&author=Hume%2c%20David Books by David Hume] at the [[Online Books Page]]
* [http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/search?amode=start&author=Hume%2c%20David Books by David Hume] at the [[Online Books Page]]
* [http://www.davidhume.org Hume Texts Online] searchable texts, with related resources
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20141207124622/http://www.utilitarian.net/hume/ David Hume] bibliography of Hume's influence on Utilitarianism.
** [[Peter Millican]]. [https://web.archive.org/web/20210309013551/https://davidhume.org/scholarship/millican ''Papers and Talks on Hume'']
* [http://www.earlymoderntexts.com David Hume] readable versions of the ''Treatise'', the Abstract of the Treatise, the two ''Enquiries'', the ''Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion'', and four essays
* [[Peter Millican]]. [https://web.archive.org/web/20190411204843/https://davidhume.org/scholarship/millican ''Critical Survey of the Literature on Hume and his First Enquiry''] (numerous essays and scholarly articles on Hume and early modern philosophy by Millican, a leading Hume specialist at Oxford U.
** [[Peter Millican]]. [https://web.archive.org/web/20200809021226/http://www.millican.org/research.htm''Research'']
* {{cite web |last1=Bennett |first1=Jonathan |author1-link=Jonathan Bennett (philosopher) |title=David Hume |url=http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/authors/hume |website=Texts From Early Modern Philosophy <!-- |access-date=7 April 2021 --> |quote=PDF, EPUB, MP3, MOBI}}<!-- readable versions of the ''Treatise'', the Abstract of the Treatise, the two ''Enquiries'', the ''Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion'', and four essays -->
** Translations of philosophical classics into contemporary English, from English, Latin, French and German.
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20201126113951/https://unendedquest.org/2019/12/01/david-humes-my-own-life-and-adam-smiths-obituary-of-hume/ ''David Hume: My Own Life'' and ''Adam Smith: obituary of Hume'']
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20141207124622/http://www.utilitarian.net/hume/ Bibliography of Hume's influence on Utilitarianism]
* [http://www.humesociety.org/ The Hume Society], publishes ''Hume Studies'' and holds conferences

{{Hume|state=expanded}}
{{Hume|state=expanded}}
{{Navboxes
{{Navboxes
Line 578: Line 655:
{{Age of Enlightenment}}
{{Age of Enlightenment}}
{{Classical economists}}
{{Classical economists}}
{{Liberalism}}
{{Evolutionary psychology}}
{{Philosophy topics}}
{{epistemology}}
{{epistemology}}
{{philosophy of religion}}
{{philosophy of religion}}
{{Philosophy of science}}
{{Philosophy of science}}
{{social and political philosophy}}
{{social and political philosophy}}
{{Political philosophy}}
{{aesthetics}}
{{aesthetics}}
{{Historians of Europe}}
{{Historians of Europe}}
{{Ethics}}
{{Ethics}}
{{Evolution}}
{{Criticism of religion}}
{{Evolutionary psychologists}}
{{Conservatism navbox}}
}}
}}

{{Authority control}}
{{Authority control}}


Line 597: Line 673:
[[Category:1711 births]]
[[Category:1711 births]]
[[Category:1776 deaths]]
[[Category:1776 deaths]]
[[Category:18th-century Scottish male writers]]
[[Category:18th-century British philosophers]]
[[Category:18th-century British diplomats]]
[[Category:18th-century British economists]]
[[Category:18th-century British essayists]]
[[Category:18th-century Scottish educators]]
[[Category:18th-century Scottish historians]]
[[Category:Action theorists]]
[[Category:Alumni of the University of Edinburgh]]
[[Category:Alumni of the University of Edinburgh]]
[[Category:British classical liberals]]
[[Category:British diplomats]]
[[Category:British male essayists]]
[[Category:British male non-fiction writers]]
[[Category:British sceptics]]
[[Category:British sceptics]]
[[Category:British social commentators]]
[[Category:Burials at Old Calton Burial Ground]]
[[Category:Burials at Old Calton Cemetery]]
[[Category:Civil servants from Edinburgh]]
[[Category:British consciousness researchers and theorists]]
[[Category:Conservatism]]
[[Category:Conservatism]]
[[Category:Criticism of rationalism]]
[[Category:British critics of religions]]
[[Category:Critics of the Catholic Church]]
[[Category:Critics of the Catholic Church]]
[[Category:Deists]]
[[Category:Deist philosophers]]
[[Category:Early Modern philosophers]]
[[Category:Diplomats from Edinburgh]]
[[Category:Empiricists]]
[[Category:Enlightenment philosophers]]
[[Category:Enlightenment philosophers]]
[[Category:Epistemologists]]
[[Category:Epistemologists]]
[[Category:Empiricists]]
[[Category:Freethought writers]]
[[Category:Historians of England]]
[[Category:Historians of England]]
[[Category:Liberalism]]
[[Category:History of economic thought]]
[[Category:Humeanism|*]]
[[Category:Members of the Philosophical Society of Edinburgh]]
[[Category:Members of the Philosophical Society of Edinburgh]]
[[Category:Moral philosophers]]
[[Category:Metaphilosophers]]
[[Category:People from Edinburgh]]
[[Category:Ontologists]]
[[Category:People of the Scottish Enlightenment]]
[[Category:Philosophers from Edinburgh]]
[[Category:Philosophers of art]]
[[Category:Philosophers of art]]
[[Category:Philosophers of economics]]
[[Category:Philosophers of economics]]
[[Category:Philosophers of ethics and morality]]
[[Category:British philosophers of education]]
[[Category:Philosophers of history]]
[[Category:Philosophers of identity]]
[[Category:Philosophers of logic]]
[[Category:Philosophers of mathematics]]
[[Category:Philosophers of mind]]
[[Category:Philosophers of mind]]
[[Category:Philosophers of psychology]]
[[Category:Philosophers of religion]]
[[Category:Philosophers of religion]]
[[Category:Philosophers of science]]
[[Category:Philosophers of science]]
[[Category:Philosophers of social science]]
[[Category:Philosophy writers]]
[[Category:Preclassical economists]]
[[Category:Preclassical economists]]
[[Category:Scottish humanists]]
[[Category:Scottish economists]]
[[Category:Scottish economists]]
[[Category:Scottish essayists]]
[[Category:Scottish educational theorists]]
[[Category:Scottish ethicists]]
[[Category:Scottish ethicists]]
[[Category:Scottish historians]]
[[Category:Scottish deists]]
[[Category:Scottish diplomats]]
[[Category:Scottish essayists]]
[[Category:Scottish humanists]]
[[Category:Scottish libertarians]]
[[Category:Scottish librarians]]
[[Category:Scottish librarians]]
[[Category:Scottish logicians]]
[[Category:Scottish monarchists]]
[[Category:Scottish philosophers]]
[[Category:Scottish philosophers]]
[[Category:Skepticism]]
[[Category:Scottish political philosophers]]
[[Category:Social commentators]]
[[Category:Secular humanists]]
[[Category:Social critics]]
[[Category:Skeptic philosophers]]
[[Category:Social philosophers]]
[[Category:Theorists on Western civilization]]
[[Category:Virtue ethicists]]
[[Category:Virtue ethicists]]
[[Category:Writers about activism and social change]]
[[Category:Writers about religion and science]]
[[Category:Writers from Edinburgh]]

Latest revision as of 01:00, 22 December 2024

David Hume
Portrait by Allan Ramsay, 1754
Born
David Home

7 May NS [26 April OS] 1711
Lawnmarket, Edinburgh, Scotland
Died25 August 1776(1776-08-25) (aged 65)
EducationUniversity of Edinburgh
Era18th-century philosophy
RegionWestern philosophy
School
Main interests
Notable ideas

David Hume (/hjuːm/; born David Home; 7 May 1711 – 25 August 1776) was a Scottish philosopher, historian, economist, and essayist who was best known for his highly influential system of empiricism, philosophical scepticism and metaphysical naturalism.[1] Beginning with A Treatise of Human Nature (1739–40), Hume strove to create a naturalistic science of man that examined the psychological basis of human nature. Hume followed John Locke in rejecting the existence of innate ideas, concluding that all human knowledge derives solely from experience. This places him with Francis Bacon, Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and George Berkeley as an empiricist.[7][8][9]

Hume argued that inductive reasoning and belief in causality cannot be justified rationally; instead, they result from custom and mental habit. We never actually perceive that one event causes another but only experience the "constant conjunction" of events. This problem of induction means that to draw any causal inferences from past experience, it is necessary to presuppose that the future will resemble the past; this metaphysical presupposition cannot itself be grounded in prior experience.[10]

An opponent of philosophical rationalists, Hume held that passions rather than reason govern human behaviour, famously proclaiming that "Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions."[7][11] Hume was also a sentimentalist who held that ethics are based on emotion or sentiment rather than abstract moral principle. He maintained an early commitment to naturalistic explanations of moral phenomena and is usually accepted by historians of European philosophy to have first clearly expounded the is–ought problem, or the idea that a statement of fact alone can never give rise to a normative conclusion of what ought to be done.[12]

Hume denied that humans have an actual conception of the self, positing that we experience only a bundle of sensations, and that the self is nothing more than this bundle of perceptions connected by an association of ideas. Hume's compatibilist theory of free will takes causal determinism as fully compatible with human freedom.[13] His philosophy of religion, including his rejection of miracles, and of the argument from design for God's existence, were especially controversial for their time. Hume left a legacy that affected utilitarianism, logical positivism, the philosophy of science, early analytic philosophy, cognitive science, theology, and many other fields and thinkers. Immanuel Kant credited Hume as the inspiration that had awakened him from his "dogmatic slumbers."

Early life

[edit]

Hume was born on 26 April 1711, as David Home, in a tenement on the north side of Edinburgh's Lawnmarket. He was the second of two sons born to Catherine Home (née Falconer), daughter of Sir David Falconer of Newton, Midlothian and his wife Mary Falconer (née Norvell),[14] and Joseph Home of Chirnside in the County of Berwick, an advocate of Ninewells. Joseph died just after David's second birthday. Catherine, who never remarried, raised the two brothers and their sister on her own.[15]

Hume changed his family name's spelling in 1734, as the surname 'Home' (pronounced as 'Hume') was not well-known in England. Hume never married and lived partly at his Chirnside family home in Berwickshire, which had belonged to the family since the 16th century. His finances as a young man were very "slender", as his family was not rich; as a younger son he had little patrimony to live on.[16]

Hume attended the University of Edinburgh at an unusually early age—either 12 or possibly as young as 10—at a time when 14 was the typical age. Initially, Hume considered a career in law, because of his family. However, in his words, he came to have:[16]

...an insurmountable aversion to everything but the pursuits of Philosophy and general Learning; and while [my family] fanceyed I was poring over Voet and Vinnius, Cicero and Virgil were the Authors which I was secretly devouring.

He had little respect for the professors of his time, telling a friend in 1735 that "there is nothing to be learnt from a Professor, which is not to be met with in Books".[17] He did not graduate.[18]

"Disease of the learned"

[edit]

At around age 18, Hume made a philosophical discovery that opened up to him "a new Scene of Thought", inspiring him "to throw up every other Pleasure or Business to apply entirely to it".[19] As he did not recount what this scene exactly was, commentators have offered a variety of speculations.[20] One prominent interpretation among contemporary Humean scholarship is that this new "scene of thought" was Hume's realisation that Francis Hutcheson's theory of moral sense could be applied to the understanding of morality as well.

From this inspiration, Hume set out to spend a minimum of 10 years reading and writing. He soon came to the verge of a mental breakdown, first starting with a coldness—which he attributed to a "Laziness of Temper"—that lasted about nine months. Scurvy spots later broke out on his fingers, persuading Hume's physician to diagnose him with the "Disease of the Learned".[citation needed]

Hume wrote that he "went under a Course of Bitters and Anti-Hysteric Pills", taken along with a pint of claret every day. He also decided to have a more active life to better continue his learning.[21] His health improved somewhat, but in 1731, he was afflicted with a ravenous appetite and palpitations. After eating well for a time, he went from being "tall, lean and raw-bon'd" to being "sturdy, robust [and] healthful-like."[22][23][24] Indeed, Hume would become well known for being obese and having a fondness for good port and cheese, often using them as philosophical metaphors for his conjectures.[25]

Career

[edit]

Despite having noble ancestry, Hume had no source of income and no learned profession by age 25. As was common at his time, he became a merchant's assistant, despite having to leave his native Scotland. He travelled via Bristol to La Flèche in Anjou, France. There he had frequent discourse with the Jesuits of the College of La Flèche.[26]

Hume was derailed in his attempts to start a university career by protests over his alleged "atheism",[27][28] also lamenting that his literary debut, A Treatise of Human Nature, "fell dead-born from the press."[14] However, he found literary success in his lifetime as an essayist, and a career as a librarian at the University of Edinburgh. These successes provided him much needed income at the time. His tenure there, and the access to research materials it provided, resulted in Hume's writing the massive six-volume The History of England, which became a bestseller and the standard history of England in its day. For over 60 years, Hume was the dominant interpreter of English history.[29]: 120  He described his "love for literary fame" as his "ruling passion"[14] and judged his two late works, the so-called "first" and "second" enquiries, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding and An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals, as his greatest literary and philosophical achievements.[14] He would ask of his contemporaries to judge him on the merits of the later texts alone, rather than on the more radical formulations of his early, youthful work, dismissing his philosophical debut as juvenilia: "A work which the Author had projected before he left College."[30] Despite Hume's protestations, a consensus exists today that his most important arguments and philosophically distinctive doctrines are found in the original form they take in the Treatise. Though he was only 23 years old when starting this work, it is now regarded as one of the most important in the history of Western philosophy.[12]

1730s

[edit]

Hume worked for four years on his first major work, A Treatise of Human Nature, subtitled "Being an Attempt to Introduce the Experimental Method of Reasoning into Moral Subjects", completing it in 1738 at age 28. Although many scholars today consider the Treatise to be Hume's most important work and one of the most important books in Western philosophy, critics in Great Britain at the time described it as "abstract and unintelligible".[31] As Hume had spent most of his savings during those four years,[21] he resolved "to make a very rigid frugality supply [his] deficiency of fortune, to maintain unimpaired [his] independency, and to regard every object as contemptible except the improvements of [his] talents in literature".[32]: 352 

Despite the disappointment, Hume later wrote: "Being naturally of a cheerful and sanguine temper, I soon recovered from the blow and prosecuted with great ardour my studies in the country."[32]: 352  There, in an attempt to make his larger work better known and more intelligible, he published the An Abstract of a Book lately Published as a summary of the main doctrines of the Treatise, without revealing its authorship.[33] This work contained the same ideas, but with a shorter and clearer explanation. Although there has been some academic speculation as to the pamphlet's true author,[34] it is generally regarded as Hume's creation.[35]

1740s

[edit]

After the publication of Essays Moral and Political in 1741—included in the later edition as Essays, Moral, Political, and Literary—Hume applied for the Chair of Pneumatics and Moral Philosophy at the University of Edinburgh. However, the position was given to William Cleghorn[36] after Edinburgh ministers petitioned the town council not to appoint Hume because he was seen as an atheist.[37]

An engraving of Hume from the first volume of his The History of England, 1754

In 1745, during the Jacobite risings, Hume tutored the Marquess of Annandale, an engagement that ended in disarray after about a year. The Marquess could not follow with Hume's lectures, his father saw little need for philosophy, and on a personal level, the Marquess found Hume's dietary tendencies to be bizarre.[38] Hume then started his great historical work, The History of England, which took fifteen years and ran to over a million words. During this time, he was also involved with the Canongate Theatre through his friend John Home, a preacher.[39]

In this context, he associated with Lord Monboddo and other thinkers of the Scottish Enlightenment in Edinburgh. From 1746, Hume served for three years as secretary to General James St Clair, who was envoy to the courts of Turin and Vienna. At that time Hume wrote Philosophical Essays Concerning Human Understanding, later published as An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. Often called the First Enquiry, it proved little more successful than the Treatise, perhaps because of the publication of his short autobiography My Own Life, which "made friends difficult for the first Enquiry".[40] By the end of this period Hume had attained his well-known corpulent stature; "the good table of the General and the prolonged inactive life had done their work", leaving him "a man of tremendous bulk".[25]

In 1749 he went to live with his brother in the countryside, although he continued to associate with the aforementioned Scottish Enlightenment figures.

1750s–1760s

[edit]

Hume's religious views were often suspect and, in the 1750s, it was necessary for his friends to avert a trial against him on the charge of heresy, specifically in an ecclesiastical court. However, he "would not have come and could not be forced to attend if he said he was not a member of the Established Church".[41] Hume failed to gain the chair of philosophy at the University of Glasgow due to his religious views. By this time, he had published the Philosophical Essays, which were decidedly anti-religious. This represented a turning point in his career and the various opportunities made available to him. Even Adam Smith, his personal friend who had vacated the Glasgow philosophy chair, was against his appointment out of concern that public opinion would be against it.[42] In 1761, all his works were banned on the Index Librorum Prohibitorum.[43]

Hume returned to Edinburgh in 1751. In the following year, the Faculty of Advocates hired him to be their Librarian, a job in which he would receive little to no pay, but which nonetheless gave him "the command of a large library".[i][14]: 11  This resource enabled him to continue historical research for The History of England. Hume's volume of Political Discourses, written in 1749 and published by Kincaid & Donaldson in 1752,[44] was the only work he considered successful on first publication.[14]: 10 

In 1753, Hume moved from his house on Riddles Court on the Lawnmarket to a house on the Canongate at the other end of the Royal Mile. Here he lived in a tenement known as Jack's Land, immediately west of the still surviving Shoemakers Land.[45]

Eventually, with the publication of his six-volume The History of England between 1754 and 1762, Hume achieved the fame that he coveted.[46] The volumes traced events from the Invasion of Julius Caesar to the Revolution of 1688 and was a bestseller in its day. Hume was also a longtime friend of bookseller Andrew Millar, who sold Hume's History (after acquiring the rights from Scottish bookseller Gavin Hamilton[47]), although the relationship was sometimes complicated. Letters between them illuminate both men's interest in the success of the History. In 1762 Hume moved from Jack's Land on the Canongate to James Court on the Lawnmarket. He sold the house to James Boswell in 1766.[48]

Later life

[edit]

From 1763 to 1765, Hume was invited to attend Lord Hertford in Paris, where he became secretary to the British embassy in France.[49] Hume was well received among Parisian society, and while there he met with Isaac de Pinto.[50] In 1765, Hume served as a chargé d'affaires in Paris, writing "despatches to the British Secretary of State".[51] He wrote of his Paris life, "I really wish often for the plain roughness of The Poker Club of Edinburgh... to correct and qualify so much lusciousness."[52] Upon returning to Britain in 1766, Hume wrote a letter to Lord Hertford after being asked to by George Colebrooke; the letter informed Lord Hertford that he had an opportunity to invest in one of Colebrooke's slave plantations in the West Indies, though Hertford ultimately decided not to do so.[53] In June of that year, Hume facilitated the purchase of a slave plantation in Martinique on behalf of his friend, the wine merchant John Stewart, by writing to the colony's governor Victor-Thérèse Charpentier.[citation needed]

According to Felix Waldmann, a former Hume Fellow at the University of Edinburgh, Hume's "puckish scepticism about the existence of religious miracles played a significant part in defining the critical outlook which underpins the practice of modern science." Waldmann also argued that Hume's views "served to reinforce the institution of racialised slavery in the later 18th century."[54][55][56] In 1766, Hume left Paris to accompany Jean-Jacques Rousseau to England. Once there, he and Rousseau fell out,[57] leaving Hume sufficiently worried about the damage to his reputation from the quarrel with Rousseau that he would author an account of the dispute, titling it "A concise and genuine account of the dispute between Mr. Hume and Mr. Rousseau".[58]

In 1767, Hume was appointed Under Secretary of State for the Northern Department. Here, he wrote that he was given "all the secrets of the Kingdom". In 1769 he returned to James' Court in Edinburgh, where he would live from 1771 until his death in 1776. Hume's nephew and namesake, David Hume of Ninewells (1757–1838), was a co-founder of the Royal Society of Edinburgh in 1783. He was a Professor of Scots Law at Edinburgh University and rose to be Principal Clerk of Session in the Scottish High Court and Baron of the Exchequer. He is buried with his uncle in Old Calton Cemetery.[59]

Autobiography

[edit]

In the last year of his life, Hume wrote an extremely brief autobiographical essay titled "My Own Life",[14] summing up his entire life in "fewer than 5 pages";[60] it contains many interesting judgments that have been of enduring interest to subsequent readers of Hume.[61][62] Donald Seibert (1984), a scholar of 18th-century literature, judged it a "remarkable autobiography, even though it may lack the usual attractions of that genre. Anyone hankering for startling revelations or amusing anecdotes had better look elsewhere."[61]

Despite condemning vanity as a dangerous passion,[63] in his autobiography Hume confesses his belief that the "love of literary fame" had served as his "ruling passion" in life, and claims that this desire "never soured my temper, notwithstanding my frequent disappointments". One such disappointment Hume discusses in this account is in the initial literary reception of the Treatise, which he claims to have overcome by means of the success of the Essays: "the work was favourably received, and soon made me entirely forget my former disappointment". Hume, in his own retrospective judgment, argues that his philosophical debut's apparent failure "had proceeded more from the manner than the matter". He thus suggests that "I had been guilty of a very usual indiscretion, in going to the press too early."

Hume also provides an unambiguous self-assessment of the relative value of his works: that "my Enquiry concerning the Principles of Morals; which, in my own opinion (who ought not to judge on that subject) is of all my writings, historical, philosophical, or literary, incomparably the best." He also wrote of his social relations: "My company was not unacceptable to the young and careless, as well as to the studious and literary", noting of his complex relation to religion, as well as to the state, that "though I wantonly exposed myself to the rage of both civil and religious factions, they seemed to be disarmed in my behalf of their wonted fury". He goes on to profess of his character: "My friends never had occasion to vindicate any one circumstance of my character and conduct." Hume concludes the essay with a frank admission:[14]

I cannot say there is no vanity in making this funeral oration of myself, but I hope it is not a misplaced one; and this is a matter of fact which is easily cleared and ascertained.

Death

[edit]
David Hume's mausoleum by Robert Adam in the Old Calton Burial Ground, Edinburgh

Diarist and biographer James Boswell saw Hume a few weeks before his death from a form of abdominal cancer. Hume told him that he sincerely believed it a "most unreasonable fancy" that there might be life after death.[64][65] Hume asked that his body be interred in a "simple Roman tomb", requesting in his will that it be inscribed only with his name and the year of his birth and death, "leaving it to Posterity to add the Rest".[66]

David Hume died at the southwest corner of St. Andrew's Square in Edinburgh's New Town, at what is now 21 Saint David Street.[67] A popular story, consistent with some historical evidence and with the help of coincidence, suggests that the street was named after Hume.[68]

His tomb stands, as he wished it, on the southwestern slope of Calton Hill, in the Old Calton Cemetery. Adam Smith later recounted Hume's amusing speculation that he might ask Charon, Hades' ferryman, to allow him a few more years of life in order to see "the downfall of some of the prevailing systems of superstition". The ferryman replied, "You loitering rogue, that will not happen these many hundred years.… Get into the boat this instant."[69]

Writings

[edit]

A Treatise of Human Nature begins with the introduction: "'Tis evident, that all the sciences have a relation, more or less, to human nature.… Even Mathematics, Natural Philosophy, and Natural Religion, are in some measure dependent on the science of Man."[70] The science of man, as Hume explains, is the "only solid foundation for the other sciences" and that the method for this science requires both experience and observation as the foundations of a logical argument.[70]: 7  In regards to this, philosophical historian Frederick Copleston (1999) suggests that it was Hume's aim to apply to the science of man the method of experimental philosophy (the term that was current at the time to imply natural philosophy), and that "Hume's plan is to extend to philosophy in general the methodological limitations of Newtonian physics."[71]

Until recently, Hume was seen as a forerunner of logical positivism, a form of anti-metaphysical empiricism. According to the logical positivists (in summary of their verification principle), unless a statement could be verified by experience, or else was true or false by definition (i.e., either tautological or contradictory), then it was meaningless. Hume, on this view, was a protopositivist, who, in his philosophical writings, attempted to demonstrate the ways in which ordinary propositions about objects, causal relations, the self, and so on, are semantically equivalent to propositions about one's experiences.[72]

Many commentators have since rejected this understanding of Humean empiricism, stressing an epistemological (rather than a semantic) reading of his project.[ii] According to this opposing view, Hume's empiricism consisted in the idea that it is our knowledge, and not our ability to conceive, that is restricted to what can be experienced. Hume thought that we can form beliefs about that which extends beyond any possible experience, through the operation of faculties such as custom and the imagination, but he was sceptical about claims to knowledge on this basis.

Impressions and ideas

[edit]

A central doctrine of Hume's philosophy, stated in the very first lines of the Treatise of Human Nature, is that the mind consists of perceptions, or the mental objects which are present to it, and which divide into two categories: "All the perceptions of the human mind resolve themselves into two distinct kinds, which I shall call impressions and ideas." Hume believed that it would "not be very necessary to employ many words in explaining this distinction", which commentators have generally taken to mean the distinction between feeling and thinking.[73] Controversially, Hume, in some sense, may regard the distinction as a matter of degree, as he takes impressions to be distinguished from ideas on the basis of their force, liveliness, and vivacity—what Henry E. Allison (2008) calls the "FLV criterion."[74] Ideas are therefore "faint" impressions. For example, experiencing the painful sensation of touching a hot pan's handle is more forceful than simply thinking about touching a hot pan. According to Hume, impressions are meant to be the original form of all our ideas. From this, Don Garrett (2002) has coined the term copy principle,[73] referring to Hume's doctrine that all ideas are ultimately copied from some original impression, whether it be a passion or sensation, from which they derive.[74]

Simple and complex

[edit]

After establishing the forcefulness of impressions and ideas, these two categories are further broken down into simple and complex: "simple perceptions or impressions and ideas are such as admit of no distinction nor separation", whereas "the complex are the contrary to these, and may be distinguished into parts".[70] When looking at an apple, a person experiences a variety of colour-sensations—what Hume notes as a complex impression. Similarly, a person experiences a variety of taste-sensations, tactile-sensations, and smell-sensations when biting into an apple, with the overall sensation—again, a complex impression. Thinking about an apple allows a person to form complex ideas, which are made of similar parts as the complex impressions they were developed from, but which are also less forceful. Hume believes that complex perceptions can be broken down into smaller and smaller parts until perceptions are reached that have no parts of their own, and these perceptions are thus referred to as simple.

Principles of association

[edit]

Regardless of how boundless it may seem; a person's imagination is confined to the mind's ability to recombine the information it has already acquired from the body's sensory experience (the ideas that have been derived from impressions). In addition, "as our imagination takes our most basic ideas and leads us to form new ones, it is directed by three principles of association, namely, resemblance, contiguity, and cause and effect":[75]

  • The principle of resemblance refers to the tendency of ideas to become associated if the objects they represent resemble one another. For example, someone looking at an illustration of a flower can conceive an idea of the physical flower because the idea of the illustrated object is associated with the physical object's idea.
  • The principle of contiguity describes the tendency of ideas to become associated if the objects they represent are near to each other in time or space, such as when the thought of a crayon in a box leads one to think of the crayon contiguous to it.
  • The principle of cause and effect refers to the tendency of ideas to become associated if the objects they represent are causally related, which explains how remembering a broken window can make someone think of a ball that had caused the window to shatter.

Hume elaborates more on the last principle, explaining that, when somebody observes that one object or event consistently produces the same object or event, that results in "an expectation that a particular event (a 'cause') will be followed by another event (an 'effect') previously and constantly associated with it".[76] Hume calls this principle custom, or habit, saying that "custom...renders our experience useful to us, and makes us expect, for the future, a similar train of events with those which have appeared in the past".[28] However, even though custom can serve as a guide in life, it still only represents an expectation. In other words:[77]

Experience cannot establish a necessary connection between cause and effect, because we can imagine without contradiction a case where the cause does not produce its usual effect…the reason why we mistakenly infer that there is something in the cause that necessarily produces its effect is because our past experiences have habituated us to think in this way.

Continuing this idea, Hume argues that "only in the pure realm of ideas, logic, and mathematics, not contingent on the direct sense awareness of reality, [can] causation safely…be applied—all other sciences are reduced to probability".[78][28] He uses this scepticism to reject metaphysics and many theological views on the basis that they are not grounded in fact and observations, and are therefore beyond the reach of human understanding.

Induction and causation

[edit]

The cornerstone of Hume's epistemology is the problem of induction. This may be the area of Hume's thought where his scepticism about human powers of reason is most pronounced.[79] The problem revolves around the plausibility of inductive reasoning, that is, reasoning from the observed behaviour of objects to their behaviour when unobserved. As Hume wrote, induction concerns how things behave when they go "beyond the present testimony of the senses, or the records of our memory".[80] Hume argues that we tend to believe that things behave in a regular manner, meaning that patterns in the behaviour of objects seem to persist into the future, and throughout the unobserved present.[81] Hume's argument is that we cannot rationally justify the claim that nature will continue to be uniform, as justification comes in only two varieties—demonstrative reasoning and probable reasoning[iii]—and both of these are inadequate. With regard to demonstrative reasoning, Hume argues that the uniformity principle cannot be demonstrated, as it is "consistent and conceivable" that nature might stop being regular.[82] Turning to probable reasoning, Hume argues that we cannot hold that nature will continue to be uniform because it has been in the past. As this is using the very sort of reasoning (induction) that is under question, it would be circular reasoning.[83] Thus, no form of justification will rationally warrant our inductive inferences.

Hume's solution to this problem is to argue that, rather than reason, natural instinct explains the human practice of making inductive inferences. He asserts that "Nature, by an absolute and uncontroulable [sic] necessity has determin'd us to judge as well as to breathe and feel." In 1985, and in agreement with Hume, John D. Kenyon writes:[84]

Reason might manage to raise a doubt about the truth of a conclusion of natural inductive inference just for a moment ... but the sheer agreeableness of animal faith will protect us from excessive caution and sterile suspension of belief.

Others, such as Charles Sanders Peirce, have demurred from Hume's solution,[85] while some, such as Kant and Karl Popper, have thought that Hume's analysis has "posed a most fundamental challenge to all human knowledge claims".[86]

The notion of causation is closely linked to the problem of induction. According to Hume, we reason inductively by associating constantly conjoined events. It is the mental act of association that is the basis of our concept of causation. At least three interpretations of Hume's theory of causation are represented in the literature:[87]

  1. the logical positivist;
  2. the sceptical realist; and
  3. the quasi-realist.

Hume acknowledged that there are events constantly unfolding, and humanity cannot guarantee that these events are caused by prior events or are independent instances. He opposed the widely accepted theory of causation that 'all events have a specific course or reason'. Therefore, Hume crafted his own theory of causation, formed through his empiricist and sceptic beliefs. He split causation into two realms: "All the objects of human reason or enquiry may naturally be divided into two kinds, to wit, Relations of Ideas, and Matters of Fact."[28] Relations of Ideas are a priori and represent universal bonds between ideas that mark the cornerstones of human thought. Matters of Fact are dependent on the observer and experience. They are often not universally held to be true among multiple persons. Hume was an Empiricist, meaning he believed "causes and effects are discoverable not by reason, but by experience".[28] He goes on to say that, even with the perspective of the past, humanity cannot dictate future events because thoughts of the past are limited, compared to the possibilities for the future. Hume's separation between Matters of Fact and Relations of Ideas is often referred to as "Hume's fork."[1]

Hume explains his theory of causation and causal inference by division into three different parts. In these three branches he explains his ideas and compares and contrasts his views to his predecessors. These branches are the Critical Phase, the Constructive Phase, and Belief.[88] In the Critical Phase, Hume denies his predecessors' theories of causation. Next, he uses the Constructive Phase to resolve any doubts the reader may have had while observing the Critical Phase. "Habit or Custom" mends the gaps in reasoning that occur without the human mind even realising it. Associating ideas has become second nature to the human mind. It "makes us expect for the future, a similar train of events with those which have appeared in the past".[28] However, Hume says that this association cannot be trusted because the span of the human mind to comprehend the past is not necessarily applicable to the wide and distant future. This leads him to the third branch of causal inference, Belief. Belief is what drives the human mind to hold that expectancy of the future is based on past experience. Throughout his explanation of causal inference, Hume is arguing that the future is not certain to be repetition of the past and that the only way to justify induction is through uniformity.

The logical positivist interpretation is that Hume analyses causal propositions, such as "A causes B", in terms of regularities in perception: "A causes B" is equivalent to "Whenever A-type events happen, B-type ones follow", where "whenever" refers to all possible perceptions.[89] In his Treatise of Human Nature, Hume wrote:[90]

Power and necessity…are…qualities of perceptions, not of objects…felt by the soul and not perceiv'd externally in bodies.

This view is rejected by sceptical realists, who argue that Hume thought that causation amounts to more than just the regular succession of events.[ii] Hume said that, when two events are causally conjoined, a necessary connection underpins the conjunction:[91]

Shall we rest contented with these two relations of contiguity and succession, as affording a complete idea of causation? By no means…there is a necessary connexion to be taken into consideration.

Angela Coventry writes that, for Hume, "there is nothing in any particular instance of cause and effect involving external objects which suggests the idea of power or necessary connection" and "we are ignorant of the powers that operate between objects".[92] However, while denying the possibility of knowing the powers between objects, Hume accepted the causal principle, writing: "I never asserted so absurd a proposition as that something could arise without a cause."[93]

It has been argued that, while Hume did not think that causation is reducible to pure regularity, he was not a fully-fledged realist either. Simon Blackburn calls this a quasi-realist reading,[94] saying that "Someone talking of cause is voicing a distinct mental set: he is by no means in the same state as someone merely describing regular sequences."[95] In Hume's words, "nothing is more usual than to apply to external bodies every internal sensation, which they occasion".[96]

'Self'

[edit]

Empiricist philosophers, such as Hume and Berkeley, favoured the bundle theory of personal identity.[97] In this theory, "the mind itself, far from being an independent power, is simply 'a bundle of perceptions' without unity or cohesive quality".[98] The self is nothing but a bundle of experiences linked by the relations of causation and resemblance; or, more accurately, the empirically warranted idea of the self is just the idea of such a bundle. According to Hume:[70]

For my part, when I enter most intimately into what I call myself, I always stumble on some particular perception or other, of heat or cold, light or shade, love or hatred, pain or pleasure. I never can catch myself at any time without a perception, and never can observe any thing but the perception. When my perceptions are removed for any time, as by sound sleep; so long I am insensible of myself, and may truly be said not to exist.

— A Treatise of Human Nature, Book I.iv, section 6

This view is supported by, for example, positivist interpreters, who have seen Hume as suggesting that terms such as "self", "person", or "mind" refer to collections of "sense-contents".[99] A modern-day version of the bundle theory of the mind has been advanced by Derek Parfit in his Reasons and Persons.[100]

However, some philosophers have criticised Hume's bundle-theory interpretation of personal identity. They argue that distinct selves can have perceptions that stand in relation to similarity and causality. Thus, perceptions must already come parcelled into distinct "bundles" before they can be associated according to the relations of similarity and causality. In other words, the mind must already possess a unity that cannot be generated, or constituted, by these relations alone. Since the bundle-theory interpretation portrays Hume as answering an ontological question, philosophers like Galen Strawson see Hume as not very concerned with such questions and have queried whether this view is really Hume's. Instead, Strawson suggests that Hume might have been answering an epistemological question about the causal origin of our concept of the self.[101] In the Appendix to the Treatise, Hume declares himself dissatisfied with his earlier account of personal identity in Book 1. Corliss Swain notes that "Commentators agree that if Hume did find some new problem" when he reviewed the section on personal identity, "he wasn't forthcoming about its nature in the Appendix."[102] One interpretation of Hume's view of the self, argued for by philosopher and psychologist James Giles, is that Hume is not arguing for a bundle theory, which is a form of reductionism, but rather for an eliminative view of the self. Rather than reducing the self to a bundle of perceptions, Hume rejects the idea of the self altogether. On this interpretation, Hume is proposing a "no-self theory" and thus has much in common with Buddhist thought (see anattā).[103] Psychologist Alison Gopnik has argued that Hume was in a position to learn about Buddhist thought during his time in France in the 1730s.[104][105]

Practical reason

[edit]

Practical reason relates to whether standards or principles exist that are also authoritative for all rational beings, dictating people's intentions and actions. Hume is mainly considered an anti-rationalist, denying the possibility for practical reason, although other philosophers such as Christine Korsgaard, Jean Hampton, and Elijah Millgram claim that Hume is not so much of an anti-rationalist as he is just a sceptic of practical reason.[106]

Hume denied the existence of practical reason as a principle because he claimed reason does not have any effect on morality, since morality is capable of producing effects in people that reason alone cannot create. As Hume explains in A Treatise of Human Nature (1740):[70]: 457 

Morals excite passions, and produce or prevent actions. Reason of itself is utterly impotent in this particular. The rules of morality, therefore, are not conclusions of our reason."

Since practical reason is supposed to regulate our actions (in theory), Hume denied practical reason on the grounds that reason cannot directly oppose passions. As Hume puts it, "Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office than to serve and obey them." Reason is less significant than any passion because reason has no original influence, while "A passion is an original existence, or, if you will, modification of existence."[70]: 415 

Practical reason is also concerned with the value of actions rather than the truth of propositions,[107] so Hume believed that reason's shortcoming of affecting morality proved that practical reason could not be authoritative for all rational beings, since morality was essential for dictating people's intentions and actions.

Ethics

[edit]

Hume's writings on ethics began in the 1740 Treatise and were refined in his An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals (1751). He understood feeling, rather than knowing, as that which governs ethical actions, stating that "moral decisions are grounded in moral sentiment."[108] Arguing that reason cannot be behind morality, he wrote:[109]

Morals excite passions, and produce or prevent actions. Reason itself is utterly impotent in this particular. The rules of morality, therefore, are not conclusions of our reason.

Hume's moral sentimentalism was shared by his close friend Adam Smith,[110][failed verification] and the two were mutually influenced by the moral reflections of their older contemporary, Francis Hutcheson.[111] Peter Singer claims that Hume's argument that morals cannot have a rational basis alone "would have been enough to earn him a place in the history of ethics."[112]

Hume also put forward the is–ought problem, later known as Hume's Law,[112] denying the possibility of logically deriving what ought to be from what is. According to the Treatise (1740), in every system of morality that Hume has read, the author begins by stating facts about the world as it is but always ends up suddenly referring to what ought to be the case. Hume demands that a reason should be given for inferring what ought to be the case, from what is the case. This is because it "seems altogether inconceivable, how this new relation can be a deduction from others."[113]

Hume's theory of ethics has been influential in modern-day meta-ethical theory,[114] helping to inspire emotivism,[115] and ethical expressivism and non-cognitivism,[116][failed verification] as well as Allan Gibbard's general theory of moral judgment and judgments of rationality.[117]

Aesthetics

[edit]

Hume's ideas about aesthetics and the theory of art are spread throughout his works, but are particularly connected with his ethical writings, and also the essays "Of the Standard of Taste" and "Of Tragedy" (1757). His views are rooted in the work of Joseph Addison and Francis Hutcheson.[118] In the Treatise (1740), he touches on the connection between beauty and deformity and vice and virtue.[119] His later writings on the subject continue to draw parallels of beauty and deformity in art with conduct and character.[120]

In "Standard of Taste", Hume argues that no rules can be drawn up about what is a tasteful object. However, a reliable critic of taste can be recognised as objective, sensible and unprejudiced, and as having extensive experience.[121] "Of Tragedy" addresses the question of why humans enjoy tragic drama. Hume was concerned with the way spectators find pleasure in the sorrow and anxiety depicted in a tragedy. He argued that this was because the spectator is aware that he is witnessing a dramatic performance. There is pleasure in realising that the terrible events that are being shown are actually fiction.[122] Furthermore, Hume laid down rules for educating people in taste and correct conduct, and his writings in this area have been very influential on English and Anglo-Saxon aesthetics.[123]

Free will, determinism, and responsibility

[edit]
Statue of Hume, sculpted by Alexander Stoddart, on the Royal Mile in Edinburgh

Hume, along with Thomas Hobbes, is cited as a classical compatibilist about the notions of freedom and determinism.[124][125] Compatibilism seeks to reconcile human freedom with the mechanist view that human beings are part of a deterministic universe, which is completely governed by physical laws. Hume, on this point, was influenced greatly by the scientific revolution, particularly by Sir Isaac Newton.[126] Hume argued that the dispute between freedom and determinism continued over 2000 years due to ambiguous terminology. He wrote: "From this circumstance alone, that a controversy has been long kept on foot…we may presume that there is some ambiguity in the expression," and that different disputants use different meanings for the same terms.[127][128]

Hume defines the concept of necessity as "the uniformity, observable in the operations of nature; where similar objects are constantly conjoined together,"[129] and liberty as "a power of acting or not acting, according to the determinations of the will."[130] He then argues that, according to these definitions, not only are the two compatible, but liberty requires necessity. For if our actions were not necessitated in the above sense, they would "have so little in connexion with motives, inclinations and circumstances, that one does not follow with a certain degree of uniformity from the other." But if our actions are not thus connected to the will, then our actions can never be free: they would be matters of "chance; which is universally allowed to have no existence."[131] Australian philosopher John Passmore writes that confusion has arisen because "necessity" has been taken to mean "necessary connexion." Once this has been abandoned, Hume argues that "liberty and necessity will be found not to be in conflict one with another."[128]

Moreover, Hume goes on to argue that in order to be held morally responsible, it is required that our behaviour be caused or necessitated, for, as he wrote:[132]

Actions are, by their very nature, temporary and perishing; and where they proceed not from some cause in the character and disposition of the person who performed them, they can neither redound to his honour, if good; nor infamy, if evil.

Hume describes the link between causality and our capacity to rationally make a decision from this an inference of the mind. Human beings assess a situation based upon certain predetermined events and from that form a choice. Hume believes that this choice is made spontaneously. Hume calls this form of decision making the liberty of spontaneity.[133]

Education writer Richard Wright considers that Hume's position rejects a famous moral puzzle attributed to French philosopher Jean Buridan. The Buridan's ass puzzle describes a donkey that is hungry. This donkey has separate bales of hay on both sides, which are of equal distances from him. The problem concerns which bale the donkey chooses. Buridan was said to believe that the donkey would die, because he has no autonomy. The donkey is incapable of forming a rational decision as there is no motive to choose one bale of hay over the other. However, human beings are different, because a human who is placed in a position where he is forced to choose one loaf of bread over another will make a decision to take one in lieu of the other. For Buridan, humans have the capacity of autonomy, and he recognises the choice that is ultimately made will be based on chance, as both loaves of bread are exactly the same. However, Wright says that Hume completely rejects this notion, arguing that a human will spontaneously act in such a situation because he is faced with impending death if he fails to do so. Such a decision is not made on the basis of chance, but rather on necessity and spontaneity, given the prior predetermined events leading up to the predicament.[126]

Hume's argument is supported by modern-day compatibilists such as R. E. Hobart, a pseudonym of philosopher Dickinson S. Miller.[134] However, P. F. Strawson argued that the issue of whether we hold one another morally responsible does not ultimately depend on the truth or falsity of a metaphysical thesis such as determinism. This is because our so holding one another is a non-rational human sentiment that is not predicated on such theses.[135][136]

Religion

[edit]

Philosopher Paul Russell (2005) contends that Hume wrote "on almost every central question in the philosophy of religion", and that these writings "are among the most important and influential contributions on this topic."[137] Touching on the philosophy, psychology, history, and anthropology of religious thought, Hume's 1757 dissertation "The Natural History of Religion" argues that the monotheistic religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all derive from earlier polytheistic religions. He went on to suggest that all religious belief "traces, in the end, to dread of the unknown".[138] Hume had also written on religious subjects in the first Enquiry, as well as later in the Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion.[137]

Religious views

[edit]

Although he wrote a great deal about religion, Hume's personal views have been the subject of much debate.[iv] Some modern critics have described Hume's religious views as agnostic or have described him as a "Pyrrhonian skeptic".[139] Contemporaries considered him to be an atheist, or at least un-Christian, enough so that the Church of Scotland seriously considered bringing charges of infidelity against him.[140] Evidence of his un-Christian beliefs can especially be found in his writings on miracles, in which he attempts to separate historical method from the narrative accounts of miracles.[139] Nevertheless, modern scholars have tended to dismiss the claims of Hume's contemporaries describing him as an atheist as coming from religiously intolerant people who did not understand Hume’s philosophy.[141] The fact that contemporaries suspected him of atheism is exemplified by a story Hume liked to tell:[142]

The best theologian he ever met, he used to say, was the old Edinburgh fishwife who, having recognized him as Hume the atheist, refused to pull him out of the bog into which he had fallen until he declared he was a Christian and repeated the Lord's prayer.

However, in works such as "Of Superstition and Enthusiasm", Hume specifically seems to support the standard religious views of his time and place.[143] This still meant that he could be very critical of the Catholic Church, dismissing it with the standard Protestant accusations of superstition and idolatry,[144][143]: 70  as well as dismissing as idolatry what his compatriots saw as uncivilised beliefs.[145] He also considered extreme Protestant sects, the members of which he called "enthusiasts", to be corrupters of religion.[146] By contrast, in "The Natural History of Religion", Hume presents arguments suggesting that polytheism had much to commend it over monotheism.[147] Additionally, when mentioning religion as a factor in his History of England, Hume uses it to show the deleterious effect it has on human progress. In his Treatise of Human Nature, Hume wrote: "Generally speaking, the errors in religions are dangerous; those in philosophy only ridiculous."[139]

Lou Reich (1998) argues that Hume was a religious naturalist and rejects interpretations of Hume as an atheist.[148] Paul Russell (2008) writes that Hume was plainly sceptical about religious belief, although perhaps not to the extent of complete atheism. He suggests that Hume's position is best characterised by the term "irreligion,"[149] while philosopher David O'Connor (2013) argues that Hume's final position was "weakly deistic". For O'Connor, Hume's "position is deeply ironic. This is because, while inclining towards a weak form of deism, he seriously doubts that we can ever find a sufficiently favourable balance of evidence to justify accepting any religious position." He adds that Hume "did not believe in the God of standard theism ... but he did not rule out all concepts of deity", and that "ambiguity suited his purposes, and this creates difficulty in definitively pinning down his final position on religion".[150]

Design argument

[edit]

One of the traditional topics of natural theology is that of the existence of God, and one of the a posteriori arguments for this is the argument from design or the teleological argument. The argument is that the existence of God can be proved by the design that is obvious in the complexity of the world, which Encyclopædia Britannica states is "the most popular", because it is:[151][unreliable source?]

...the most accessible of the theistic arguments ... which identifies evidences of design in nature, inferring from them a divine designer ... The fact that the universe as a whole is a coherent and efficiently functioning system likewise, in this view, indicates a divine intelligence behind it.

In An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Hume wrote that the design argument seems to depend upon our experience, and its proponents "always suppose the universe, an effect quite singular and unparalleled, to be the proof of a Deity, a cause no less singular and unparalleled".[152] Philosopher Louise E. Loeb (2010) notes that Hume is saying that only experience and observation can be our guide to making inferences about the conjunction between events. However, according to Hume:[153]

We observe neither God nor other universes, and hence no conjunction involving them. There is no observed conjunction to ground an inference either to extended objects or to God, as unobserved causes.

Hume also criticised the argument in his Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (1779). Hume proposes a finite universe with a finite number of particles. Given infinite time, these particles could randomly fall into any arrangement, including our seemingly designed world.[1]

A century later, the idea of order without design was rendered more plausible by Charles Darwin's discovery that the adaptations of the forms of life result from the natural selection of inherited characteristics.[151][unreliable source?] For philosopher James D. Madden, it is "Hume, rivaled only by Darwin, [who] has done the most to undermine in principle our confidence in arguments from design among all figures in the Western intellectual tradition".[154]

Finally, Hume discussed a version of the anthropic principle, which is the idea that theories of the universe are constrained by the need to allow for man's existence in it as an observer. Hume has his sceptical mouthpiece Philo suggest that there may have been many worlds, produced by an incompetent designer, whom he called a "stupid mechanic". In his Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, Hume wrote:[155]

Many worlds might have been botched and bungled throughout an eternity, ere this system was struck out: much labour lost: many fruitless trials made: and a slow, but continued improvement carried on during infinite ages in the art of world-making.

American philosopher Daniel Dennett has suggested that this mechanical explanation of teleology, although "obviously ... an amusing philosophical fantasy", anticipated the notion of natural selection, the 'continued improvement' being like "any Darwinian selection algorithm".[156]

Problem of miracles

[edit]

In his discussion of miracles, Hume argues that we should not believe miracles have occurred and that they do not therefore provide us with any reason to think God exists.[157] In An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding (Section 10), Hume defines a miracle as "a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the Deity, or by the interposition of some invisible agent". Hume says we believe an event that has frequently occurred is likely to occur again, but we also take into account those instances where the event did not occur:[158]

A wise man ... considers which side is supported by the greater number of experiments. ... A hundred instances or experiments on one side, and fifty on another, afford a doubtful expectation of any event; though a hundred uniform experiments, with only one that is contradictory, reasonably beget a pretty strong degree of assurance. In all cases, we must balance the opposite experiments ... and deduct the smaller number from the greater, in order to know the exact force of the superior evidence.

Hume discusses the testimony of those who report miracles. He wrote that testimony might be doubted even from some great authority in case the facts themselves are not credible: "[T]he evidence, resulting from the testimony, admits of a diminution, greater or less, in proportion as the fact is more or less unusual."[159]

Although Hume leaves open the possibility for miracles to occur and be reported, he offers various arguments against this ever having happened in history.[160] He points out that people often lie, and they have good reasons to lie about miracles occurring either because they believe they are doing so for the benefit of their religion or because of the fame that results. Furthermore, people by nature enjoy relating miracles they have heard without caring for their veracity and thus miracles are easily transmitted even when false. Also, Hume notes that miracles seem to occur mostly in "ignorant and barbarous nations"[161] and times, and the reason they do not occur in the civilised societies is such societies are not awed by what they know to be natural events. Hume recognizes that over a long period of time, various coincidences can provide the appearance of intention. Finally, the miracles of each religion argue against all other religions and their miracles, and so even if a proportion of all reported miracles across the world fit Hume's requirement for belief, the miracles of each religion make the other less likely.[162]

Hume was extremely pleased with his argument against miracles in his Enquiry. He states, "I flatter myself, that I have discovered an argument of a like nature, which, if just, will, with the wise and learned, be an everlasting check to all kinds of superstitious delusion, and consequently, will be useful as long as the world endures."[163] Thus, Hume's argument against miracles had a more abstract basis founded upon the scrutiny, not just primarily of miracles, but of all forms of belief systems. It is a commonsense notion of veracity based upon epistemological evidence, and founded on a principle of rationality, proportionality and reasonability.[162]

The criterion for assessing Hume's belief system is based on the balance of probability whether something is more likely than not to have occurred. Since the weight of empirical experience contradicts the notion for the existence of miracles, such accounts should be treated with scepticism. Further, the myriad of accounts of miracles contradict one another, as some people who receive miracles will aim to prove the authority of Jesus, whereas others will aim to prove the authority of Muhammad or some other religious prophet or deity. These various differing accounts weaken the overall evidential power of miracles.[164][failed verification]

Despite all this, Hume observes that belief in miracles is popular, and that "the gazing populace… receive greedily, without examination, whatever soothes superstition, and promotes wonder."[165]

Critics have argued that Hume's position assumes the character of miracles and natural laws prior to any specific examination of miracle claims, thus it amounts to a subtle form of begging the question. To assume that testimony is a homogeneous reference group seems unwise- to compare private miracles with public miracles, unintellectual observers with intellectual observers and those who have little to gain and much to lose with those with much to gain and little to lose is not convincing to many. Indeed, many have argued that miracles not only do not contradict the laws of nature but require the laws of nature to be intelligible as miraculous, and thus subverting the law of nature. For example, William Adams remarks that "there must be an ordinary course of nature before anything can be extraordinary. There must be a stream before anything can be interrupted."[166] They have also noted that it requires an appeal to inductive inference, as none have observed every part of nature nor examined every possible miracle claim, for instance those in the future. This, in Hume's philosophy, was especially problematic.[167]

Little appreciated is the voluminous literature either foreshadowing Hume, in the likes of Thomas Sherlock[168] or directly responding to and engaging with Hume—from William Paley,[169] William Adams,[170] John Douglas,[171] John Leland,[172] and George Campbell,[173] among others. Regarding the latter, it is rumoured that, having read Campbell's Dissertation, Hume remarked that "the Scotch theologue had beaten him."[174]

Hume's main argument concerning miracles is that miracles by definition are singular events that differ from the established laws of nature. Such natural laws are codified as a result of past experiences. Therefore, a miracle is a violation of all prior experience and thus incapable on this basis of reasonable belief. However, the probability that something has occurred in contradiction of all past experience should always be judged to be less than the probability that either one's senses have deceived one, or the person recounting the miraculous occurrence is lying or mistaken, Hume would say, all of which he had past experience of. For Hume, this refusal to grant credence does not guarantee correctness. He offers the example of an Indian Prince, who, having grown up in a hot country, refuses to believe that water has frozen. By Hume's lights, this refusal is not wrong and the prince "reasoned justly;" it is presumably only when he has had extensive experience of the freezing of water that he has warrant to believe that the event could occur.[159]

So, for Hume, either the miraculous event will become a recurrent event or else it will never be rational to believe it occurred. The connection to religious belief is left unexplained throughout, except for the close of his discussion where Hume notes the reliance of Christianity upon testimony of miraculous occurrences. He makes an ironic remark that anyone who "is moved by faith to assent" to revealed testimony "is conscious of a continued miracle in his own person, which subverts all principles of his understanding, and gives him a determination to believe what is most contrary to custom and experience."[175][176] Hume writes that "All the testimony whichever was really given for any miracle, or ever will be given, is a subject of derision."[159]

As a historian of England

[edit]
David Hume by Allan Ramsay, 1766; "Where men are the most sure and arrogant, they are commonly the most mistaken, and have there given reins to passion, without that proper deliberation and suspense, which can alone secure them from the grossest absurdities." —An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals, § 9.13 : Conclusion, Pt. 1 (1751)

From 1754 to 1762 Hume published The History of England, a six-volume work, that extends (according to its subtitle) "From the Invasion of Julius Caesar to the Revolution in 1688." Inspired by Voltaire's sense of the breadth of history, Hume widened the focus of the field away from merely kings, parliaments, and armies, to literature and science as well. He argued that the quest for liberty was the highest standard for judging the past, and concluded that after considerable fluctuation, England at the time of his writing had achieved "the most entire system of liberty that was ever known amongst mankind".[177] It "must be regarded as an event of cultural importance. In its own day, moreover, it was an innovation, soaring high above its very few predecessors."[178] Hume's History of England made him famous as a historian before he was ever considered a serious philosopher. In this work, Hume uses history to tell the story of the rise of England and what led to its greatness and the disastrous effects that religion has had on its progress. For Hume, the history of England's rise may give a template for others who would also like to rise to its current greatness.[139]

Hume's The History of England was profoundly impacted by his Scottish background. The science of sociology, which is rooted in Scottish thinking of the eighteenth century, had never before been applied to British philosophical history. Because of his Scottish background, Hume was able to bring an outsider's lens to English history that the insulated English whigs lacked.[29]: 122 

Hume's coverage of the political upheavals of the 17th century relied in large part on the Earl of Clarendon's History of the Rebellion and Civil Wars in England (1646–69). Generally, Hume took a moderate royalist position and considered revolution unnecessary to achieve necessary reform. Hume was considered a Tory historian and emphasised religious differences more than constitutional issues. Laird Okie explains that "Hume preached the virtues of political moderation, but ... it was moderation with an anti-Whig, pro-royalist coloring."[179] For "Hume shared the ... Tory belief that the Stuarts were no more high-handed than their Tudor predecessors".[180] "Even though Hume wrote with an anti-Whig animus, it is, paradoxically, correct to regard the History as an establishment work, one which implicitly endorsed the ruling oligarchy".[181] Historians have debated whether Hume posited a universal unchanging human nature, or allowed for evolution and development.[182]

The debate between Tory and the Whig historians can be seen in the initial reception to Hume's History of England. The whig-dominated world of 1754 overwhelmingly disapproved of Hume's take on English history. In later editions of the book, Hume worked to "soften or expunge many villainous whig strokes which had crept into it."[29]: 121 

Hume did not consider himself a pure Tory. Before 1745, he was more akin to an "independent whig." In 1748, he described himself as "a whig, though a very skeptical one." This description of himself as in between whiggism and toryism, helps one understand that his History of England should be read as his attempt to work out his own philosophy of history.[29]: 122 

Robert Roth argues that Hume's histories display his biases against Presbyterians and Puritans. Roth says his anti-Whig pro-monarchy position diminished the influence of his work, and that his emphasis on politics and religion led to a neglect of social and economic history.[183]

Hume was an early cultural historian of science. His short biographies of leading scientists explored the process of scientific change. He developed new ways of seeing scientists in the context of their times by looking at how they interacted with society and each other. He covers over forty scientists, with special attention paid to Francis Bacon, Robert Boyle, and Isaac Newton. Hume particularly praised William Harvey, writing about his treatise of the circulation of the blood: "Harvey is entitled to the glory of having made, by reasoning alone, without any mixture of accident, a capital discovery in one of the most important branches of science."[184]

The History became a best-seller and made Hume a wealthy man who no longer had to take up salaried work for others.[185] It was influential for nearly a century, despite competition from imitations by Smollett (1757), Goldsmith (1771) and others. By 1894, there were at least 50 editions as well as abridgements for students, and illustrated pocket editions, probably produced specifically for women.[186]

Political theory

[edit]

Many of Hume's political ideas, such as limited government, private property when there is scarcity, and constitutionalism, are first principles of liberalism.[187] Thomas Jefferson banned the History from University of Virginia, feeling that it had "spread universal toryism over the land."[188] By comparison, Samuel Johnson thought Hume to be "a Tory by chance [...] for he has no principle. If he is anything, he is a Hobbist."[189] A major concern of Hume's political philosophy is the importance of the rule of law. He also stresses throughout his political essays the importance of moderation in politics, public spirit, and regard to the community.[190]

Throughout the period of the American Revolution, Hume had varying views. For instance, in 1768 he encouraged total revolt on the part of the Americans. In 1775, he became certain that a revolution would take place and said that he believed in the American principle and wished the British government would let them be. Hume's influence on some of the Founders can be seen in Benjamin Franklin's suggestion at the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 that no high office in any branch of government should receive a salary, which is a suggestion Hume had made in his emendation of James Harrington's Oceana.[191]

The legacy of religious civil war in 18th-century Scotland, combined with the relatively recent memory of the 1715 and 1745 Jacobite risings, had fostered in Hume a distaste for enthusiasm and factionalism. These appeared to him to threaten the fragile and nascent political and social stability of a country that was deeply politically and religiously divided.[192][failed verification] Hume thought that society is best governed by a general and impartial system of laws; he is less concerned about the form of government that administers these laws, so long as it does so fairly. However, he also clarified that a republic must produce laws, while "monarchy, when absolute, contains even something repugnant to law."[193]

Hume expressed suspicion of attempts to reform society in ways that departed from long-established custom, and he counselled peoples not to resist their governments except in cases of the most egregious tyranny.[194] However, he resisted aligning himself with either of Britain's two political parties, the Whigs and the Tories, explaining that "my views of things are more conformable to Whig principles; my representations of persons to Tory prejudices".[195]

The scholar Jerry Z. Muller argues that Hume's political thoughts have characteristics that later became typical for American and British conservatism, which contain more positive views of capitalism than conservatism does elsewhere.[196] Canadian philosopher Neil McArthur writes that Hume believed that we should try to balance our demands for liberty with the need for strong authority, without sacrificing either. McArthur characterises Hume as a "precautionary conservative,"[197]: 124  whose actions would have been "determined by prudential concerns about the consequences of change, which often demand we ignore our own principles about what is ideal or even legitimate."[197][failed verification] Hume supported the liberty of the press, and was sympathetic to democracy, when suitably constrained. American historian Douglass Adair has argued that Hume was a major inspiration for James Madison's writings, and the essay "Federalist No. 10" in particular.[198]

Hume offered his view on the best type of society in an essay titled "Idea of a Perfect Commonwealth", which lays out what he thought was the best form of government. He hoped that "in some future age, an opportunity might be afforded of reducing the theory to practice, either by a dissolution of some old government, or by the combination of men to form a new one, in some distant part of the world". He defended a strict separation of powers, decentralisation, extending the franchise to anyone who held property of value and limiting the power of the clergy. The system of the Swiss militia was proposed as the best form of protection. Elections were to take place on an annual basis and representatives were to be unpaid.[199] Political philosophers Leo Strauss and Joseph Cropsey, writing of Hume's thoughts about "the wise statesman", note that he "will bear a reverence to what carries the marks of age." Also, if he wishes to improve a constitution, his innovations will take account of the "ancient fabric", in order not to disturb society.[200]

In the political analysis of philosopher George Holland Sabine, the scepticism of Hume extended to the doctrine of government by consent. He notes that "allegiance is a habit enforced by education and consequently as much a part of human nature as any other motive."[201]

In the 1770s, Hume was critical of British policies toward the American colonies and advocated for American independence. He wrote in 1771 that "our union with America…in the nature of things, cannot long subsist."[57]

Contributions to economic thought

[edit]
Statues of David Hume and Adam Smith by David Watson Stevenson on the Scottish National Portrait Gallery in Edinburgh

Hume expressed his economic views in his Political Discourses, which were incorporated in Essays and Treatises as Part II of Essays, Moral and Political.[8] To what extent he was influenced by Adam Smith is difficult to assess; however, both of them had similar principles supported from historical events.[8] At the same time Hume did not demonstrate concrete system of economic theory which could be observed in Smith's Wealth of Nations. However, he introduced several new ideas around which the "classical economics" of the 18th century was built.[8] Through his discussions on politics, Hume developed many ideas that are prevalent in the field of economics. This includes ideas on private property, inflation, and foreign trade.[202] Referring to his essay "Of the Balance of Trade", economist Paul Krugman (2012) has remarked that "David Hume created what I consider the first true economic model."[203]

In contrast to Locke, Hume believes that private property is not a natural right. Hume argues it is justified, because resources are limited. Private property would be an unjustified, "idle ceremonial," if all goods were unlimited and available freely.[204] Hume also believed in an unequal distribution of property, because perfect equality would destroy the ideas of thrift and industry. Perfect equality would thus lead to impoverishment.[205][206]

David Hume anticipated modern monetarism. First, Hume contributed to the theory of quantity and of interest rate. Hume has been credited with being the first to prove that, on an abstract level, there is no quantifiable amount of nominal money that a country needs to thrive. He understood that there was a difference between nominal and real money.

Second, Hume has a theory of causation which fits in with the Chicago-school "black box" approach. According to Hume, cause and effect are related only through correlation. Hume shared the belief with modern monetarists that changes in the supply of money can affect consumption and investment.

Lastly, Hume was a vocal advocate of a stable private sector, though also having some non-monetarist aspects to his economic philosophy. Having a stated preference for rising prices, for instance, Hume considered government debt to be a sort of substitute for actual money, referring to such debt as "a kind of paper credit." He also believed in heavy taxation, believing that it increases effort. Hume's economic approach evidently resembles his other philosophies, in that he does not choose one side indefinitely, but sees gray in the situation[207]

Legacy

[edit]
Hume's statue on Edinburgh's Royal Mile, sculpted by Alexander Stoddart

Due to Hume's vast influence on contemporary philosophy, a large number of approaches in contemporary philosophy and cognitive science are today called "Humean."[12]

The writings of Thomas Reid, a Scottish philosopher and contemporary of Hume, were often critical of Hume's scepticism. Reid formulated his common sense philosophy, in part, as a reaction against Hume's views.[208]

Hume influenced, and was influenced by, the Christian philosopher Joseph Butler. Hume was impressed by Butler's way of thinking about religion, and Butler may well have been influenced by Hume's writings.[209][137]

Attention to Hume's philosophical works grew after the German philosopher Immanuel Kant, in his Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics (1783), credited Hume with awakening him from his "dogmatic slumber."[210]

According to Arthur Schopenhauer, "there is more to be learned from each page of David Hume than from the collected philosophical works of Hegel, Herbart and Schleiermacher taken together."[211]

A. J. Ayer, while introducing his classic exposition of logical positivism in 1936, claimed that his views were "the logical outcome of the empiricism of Berkeley and David Hume".[212]

Albert Einstein, in 1915, wrote that he was inspired by Hume's positivism when formulating his theory of special relativity.[213][214]

Hume's problem of induction was also of fundamental importance to the philosophy of Karl Popper. In his autobiography, Unended Quest, he wrote: "Knowledge ... is objective; and it is hypothetical or conjectural. This way of looking at the problem made it possible for me to reformulate Hume's problem of induction." This insight resulted in Popper's major work The Logic of Scientific Discovery.[215] In his Conjectures and Refutations, he wrote that he "approached the problem of induction through Hume", since Hume was "perfectly right in pointing out that induction cannot be logically justified".[216]

Hume's rationalism in religious subjects influenced, via German-Scottish theologian Johann Joachim Spalding, the German neology school and rational theology, and contributed to the transformation of German theology in the Age of Enlightenment.[217][218] Hume pioneered a comparative history of religion,[219][220] tried to explain various rites and traditions as being based on deception[221][222] and challenged various aspects of rational and natural theology, such as the argument from design.[219]

Danish theologian and philosopher Søren Kierkegaard adopted "Hume's suggestion that the role of reason is not to make us wise but to reveal our ignorance," though taking it as a reason for the necessity of religious faith, or fideism. The "fact that Christianity is contrary to reason…is the necessary precondition for true faith."[223] Political theorist Isaiah Berlin, who has also pointed out the similarities between the arguments of Hume and Kierkegaard against rational theology,[223] has written about Hume's influence on what Berlin calls the counter-Enlightenment and on German anti-rationalism.[224] Berlin has also once said of Hume that "no man has influenced the history of philosophy to a deeper or more disturbing degree."[225]

In 2003, philosopher Jerry Fodor described Hume's Treatise as "the founding document of cognitive science."[226][227]

Hume engaged with contemporary intellectuals including Jean-Jacques Rousseau, James Boswell, and Adam Smith (who acknowledged Hume's influence on his economics and political philosophy).

Morris and Brown (2019) write that Hume is "generally regarded as one of the most important philosophers to write in English."[1]

In September 2020, the David Hume Tower, a University of Edinburgh building, was renamed to 40 George Square; this was following a campaign led by students of the university to rename it, in objection to Hume's writings related to race.[228][229][230][231]

Works

[edit]
  • 1734. A Kind of History of My Life. – MSS 23159 National Library of Scotland.[32][76]
    • A letter to an unnamed physician, asking for advice about "the Disease of the Learned" that then afflicted him. Here he reports that at the age of eighteen "there seem'd to be open'd up to me a new Scene of Thought" that made him "throw up every other Pleasure or Business" and turned him to scholarship.[32]
  • 1739–1740. A Treatise of Human Nature: Being an Attempt to introduce the experimental Method of Reasoning into Moral Subjects.[70]
    • Hume intended to see whether the Treatise of Human Nature met with success, and if so, to complete it with books devoted to Politics and Criticism. However, as Hume explained, "It fell dead-born from the press, without reaching such distinction as even to excite a murmur among the zealots"[14]: 352  and so his further project was not completed.
  • 1740. An Abstract of a Book lately Published: Entitled A Treatise of Human Nature etc.
    • Anonymously published, but almost certainly written by Hume[v] in an attempt to popularise his Treatise. This work is of considerable philosophical interest as it spells out what Hume considered "The Chief Argument" of the Treatise, in a way that seems to anticipate the structure of the Enquiry concerning Human Understanding.
  • 1741. Essays, Moral, Political, and Literary (2nd ed.)[232]
    • A collection of pieces written and published over many years, though most were collected together in 1753–54. Many of the essays are on politics and economics; other topics include aesthetic judgement, love, marriage and polygamy, and the demographics of ancient Greece and Rome. The Essays show some influence from Addison's Tatler and The Spectator, which Hume read avidly in his youth.
  • 1745. A Letter from a Gentleman to His Friend in Edinburgh: Containing Some Observations on a Specimen of the Principles concerning Religion and Morality, said to be maintain'd in a Book lately publish'd, intituled A Treatise of Human Nature etc.
    • Contains a letter written by Hume to defend himself against charges of atheism and scepticism, while applying for a chair at Edinburgh University.
  • 1742. "Of Essay Writing."[233]
  • 1748. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding.
    • Contains reworking of the main points of the Treatise, Book 1, with the addition of material on free will (adapted from Book 2), miracles, the Design Argument, and mitigated scepticism. Of Miracles, section X of the Enquiry, was often published separately.
  • 1751. An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals.
    • A reworking of material on morality from Book 3 of the Treatise, but with a significantly different emphasis. It "was thought by Hume to be the best of his writings."[234]
  • 1752. Political Discourses (part II of Essays, Moral, Political, and Literary within the larger Essays and Treatises on Several Subjects, vol. 1).
    • Included in Essays and Treatises on Several Subjects (1753–56) reprinted 1758–77.
  • 1752–1758. Political Discourses/Discours politiques
  • 1757. Four Dissertations includes 4 essays:
    • "The Natural History of Religion"
    • "Of the Passions"
    • "Of Tragedy"
    • "Of the Standard of Taste"
  • 1754–1762. The History of England – sometimes referred to as The History of Great Britain.[235]
    • More a category of books than a single work, Hume's history spanned "from the invasion of Julius Caesar to the Revolution of 1688" and went through over 100 editions. Many considered it the standard history of England in its day.
  • 1760. "Sister Peg"
    • Hume claimed to have authored an anonymous political pamphlet satirizing the failure of the British Parliament to create a Scottish militia in 1760. Although the authorship of the work is disputed, Hume wrote Alexander Carlyle in early 1761 claiming authorship. The readership of the time attributed the work to Adam Ferguson, a friend and associate of Hume's who has been sometimes called "the founder of modern sociology." Some contemporary scholars concur in the judgment that Ferguson, not Hume, was the author of this work.
  • 1776. "My Own Life."[14]
    • Penned in April, shortly before his death, this autobiography was intended for inclusion in a new edition of Essays and Treatises on Several Subjects. It was first published by Adam Smith, who claimed that by doing so he had incurred "ten times more abuse than the very violent attack I had made upon the whole commercial system of Great Britain."[236]
  • 1777. "Essays on Suicide and the Immortality of the Soul."[237]
  • 1779. Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion.
    • Published posthumously by his nephew, David Hume the Younger. Being a discussion among three fictional characters concerning the nature of God, and is an important portrayal of the argument from design. Despite some controversy, most scholars agree that the view of Philo, the most sceptical of the three, comes closest to Hume's own.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Notes

[edit]
  1. ^ "The Faculty of Advocates chose me their Librarian, an office from which I received little or no emolument, but which gave me the command of a large library." (Hume 1776:11).
  2. ^ a b For example, see Craig (1987, Ch. 2); Strawson (2014); and Wright (1983).
  3. ^ These are Hume's terms. In modern parlance, demonstration may be termed deductive reasoning, while probability may be termed inductive reasoning. Millican, Peter. 1996. Hume, Induction and Probability. Leeds: University of Leeds. Archived from the original on 20 October 2017. Retrieved 6 June 2014.
  4. ^ For example, see Russell (2008); O'Connor (2013); and Norton (1993).
  5. ^ For this, see: Keynes, J. M. and P. Sraffa. 1965. "Introduction." In An Abstract of A Treatise of Human Nature, by D. Hume (1740). Connecticut: Archon Books

Citations

[edit]
  1. ^ a b c d Morris, William Edward, and Charlotte R. Brown. 2019 [2001]. "David Hume." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford: Metaphysics Research Lab. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
  2. ^ Fumerton, Richard (21 February 2000). "Foundationalist Theories of Epistemic Justification". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 19 August 2018.
  3. ^ Demeter, Tamás (2016). David Hume and the culture of Scottish Newtonianism : methodology and ideology in Enlightenment inquiry. Brill. ISBN 978-90-04-32731-3. OCLC 960722703.
  4. ^ David Bostock, Philosophy of Mathematics: An Introduction, Wiley-Blackwell, 2009, p. 43: "All of Descartes, Locke, Berkeley, and Hume supposed that mathematics is a theory of our ideas, but none of them offered any argument for this conceptualist claim, and apparently took it to be uncontroversial."
  5. ^ The Problem of Perception (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy): "Paraphrasing David Hume (1739...; see also Locke 1690, Berkeley 1710, Russell 1912): nothing is ever directly present to the mind in perception except perceptual appearances."
  6. ^ David, Marian (3 October 2018). "The Correspondence Theory of Truth". In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University – via Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  7. ^ a b Atherton 1999, p. ?.
  8. ^ a b c d Cranston, Maurice, and Thomas Edmund Jessop. 2020 [1999] "David Hume." Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
  9. ^ Harris, M. H. 1966. "David Hume". Library Quarterly 36 (April): 88–98.
  10. ^ Berlin, Isaiah (2013). The Roots of Romanticism (2nd ed.). Princeton: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0691156200.
  11. ^ Hume 1739, p. 415.
  12. ^ a b c Garrett, Don. 2015. Hume (reprint ed.). London: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-28334-2.
  13. ^ "Hume on Free Will". stanford.edu. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. 2016.
  14. ^ a b c d e f g h i j Hume, David. 1778 [1776]. "My Own Life." In The History of England, from the Invasion of Julius Cæsar to the Revolution in 1688 1. London. Archived from the original on 13 August 2015. Also available via Rutgers University. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
  15. ^ Morris, Ted. 2018 [2013]. "David Hume Biography." The Hume Society. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
  16. ^ a b Hume 1778, p. 3.
  17. ^ Mossner 1958, pp. 30–33, quoted in Wright (2009, p. 10)
  18. ^ Harris 2004, p. 35.
  19. ^ Hume 1993, p. 346.
  20. ^ Johnson 1995, pp. 8–9.
  21. ^ a b Mossner 1950, p. 193.
  22. ^ Hume, David. 1932 [1734] "Letter to a [Dr George Cheyne]". pp. 13–15 in The Letters of David Hume 1, edited by J. Y. T. Greig. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-186158-1. doi:10.1093/actrade/9780199693245.book.1.
  23. ^ Mossner 1980, p. 204.
  24. ^ Wright, John P. 2003. "Dr. George Cheyne, Chevalier Ramsay, and Hume's Letter to a Physician." Hume Studies 29(1):125–141. – via Project MUSE. doi:10.1353/hms.2011.0100.
  25. ^ a b Mossner 1980, p. 204.
  26. ^ Huxley, Thomas Henry (2011) [1879]. Hume. English Men of Letters. Vol. 39. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 7–8. ISBN 978-1-108-03477-7.
  27. ^ Hume, David. 2007 [1748]. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, edited by P. Millican. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-152635-0. OCLC 314220887. pp. lxiii–lxiv.
  28. ^ a b c d e f Hume, David. 1990 [1748]. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. New York: Anchor/Doubleday.
  29. ^ a b c d Trevor-Roper, Hugh (2010). History and the Enlightenment. Yale University Press.
  30. ^ Hume, David. 1777. Essays and Treatises on Several Subjects 2. London. Archived from the original on 13 August 2015. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
  31. ^ Mossner 1950, p. 195.
  32. ^ a b c d Hume, David. 1993 [1734]. "A Kind of History of My Life." In The Cambridge Companion to Hume, edited by D. F. Norton. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-38710-1.
  33. ^ Hume 1740.
  34. ^ Norton 1993, p. 31.
  35. ^ Redman 1997, p. 175, footnote 19.
  36. ^ Nobbs, Douglas. 1965. "The Political Ideas of William Cleghorn, Hume's Academic Rival." Journal of the History of Ideas 26(4):575–586. doi:10.2307/2708501. JSTOR 2708501. p. 575.
  37. ^ Lorkowski, C. M. "David Hume: Religion." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  38. ^ Mossner 1950, p. 172.
  39. ^ Fieser 2005, p. xxii.
  40. ^ Buckle, Stephen. 1999. "Hume's biography and Hume's philosophy." Australasian Journal of Philosophy 77:1–25. doi:10.1080/00048409912348781.
  41. ^ Emerson 2009, p. 244.
  42. ^ Rivers, Isabel. 2000. Reason, Grace, and Sentiment: A Study of the Language of Religion and Ethics in England, 1660–1780 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-511-48447-6. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511484476. p. 255.
  43. ^ "BFE – Censored publications – Search result". search.beaconforfreedom.org. Archived from the original on 2 December 2021. Retrieved 2 December 2021.
  44. ^ Sher, Richard B. 2008. The Enlightenment and the Book: Scottish Authors and Their Publishers in Eighteenth-Century Britain, Ireland, and America, (Chicago Studies in Ethnomusicology Series). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-75254-9. p. 312.
  45. ^ grant's Old and New Edinburgh vol.3 p.9
  46. ^ Emerson 2009, p. 98.
  47. ^ "The manuscripts, Letter from David Hume to Andrew Millar, 12 April, 1755". millar-project.ed.ac.uk. Archived from the original on 15 January 2016. Retrieved 1 June 2016.
  48. ^ Grants Old and New Edinburgh vol 1, p. 97
  49. ^ Klibansky, Raymond, and Ernest C. Mossner, eds. 1954. New Letters of David Hume. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 77–79.
  50. ^ Popkin, Richard H. (1970). "Hume and Isaac de Pinto". Texas Studies in Literature and Language. 12 (3): 417–430. JSTOR 40754109.
  51. ^ Fieser, James. 2005 [2003]. A Bibliography of Hume's Writings and Early Responses Archived 3 February 2021 at the Wayback Machine. Bristol: Thoemmes Press. – via Academia.edu. p. 59.
  52. ^ Mossner 1980, p. 285.
  53. ^ Waldmann, Felix, ed. 2014. Further Letters of David Hume Archived 27 April 2021 at the Wayback Machine. Edinburgh: Edinburgh Bibliographical Society. pp. 65–69. – via Academia.edu.
  54. ^ Waldmann, Felix (17 July 2020). "David Hume was a brilliant philosopher but also a racist involved in slavery". The Scotsman. Retrieved 14 September 2020.
  55. ^ Ashton, David; Hutton, Peter (28 December 2023). "Edinburgh University rush to condemn David Hume shames it". The Herald (Glasgow). Retrieved 25 January 2024.
  56. ^ Ashton, David; Hutton, Peter (2023). "David Hume – An Apologia". Scottish Affairs. 32 (3): 347–364. doi:10.3366/scot.2023.0468. S2CID 259961720. Retrieved 25 January 2024.
  57. ^ a b Scurr, Ruth. 4 November 2017. "An Enlightened Friendship." Wall Street Journal.
  58. ^ Becker, T., and P. A. de Hondt, trans. 1766. A concise and genuine account of the dispute between Mr. Hume and Mr. Rousseau: with the letters that passed between them during their controversy. London. Available in full text. Retrieved 19 May 2020.
  59. ^ Biographical Index of Former Fellows of the Royal Society of Edinburgh 1783–2002 (PDF). The Royal Society of Edinburgh. 2006. ISBN 978-0-902198-84-5. Archived from the original (PDF) on 24 January 2013. Retrieved 14 November 2016.
  60. ^ Stanley, Liz. 2006. "The Writing of David Hume’s 'My Own Life': The Persona of the Philosopher and the Philosopher Manqué." Auto/Biography 14:1–19. doi:10.1191/0967550706ab051oa.
  61. ^ a b Siebert, Donald T. 1984. "David Hume's Last Words: The Importance of My Own Life." Studies in Scottish Literature 19(1):132–147. Retrieved 18 May 2020.
  62. ^ Buckle, Stephen (1999). "Hume's biography and Hume's philosophy". Australasian Journal of Philosophy. 77: 1–25. doi:10.1080/00048409912348781.
  63. ^ Galvagni, Enrico (1 June 2020). "Hume on Pride, Vanity and Society". Journal of Scottish Philosophy. 18 (2): 157–173. doi:10.3366/jsp.2020.0265. ISSN 1479-6651. S2CID 225800023.
  64. ^ Weis, Charles M., and Frederick A. Pottle, eds. 1970. Boswell in Extremes, 1776–1778. New York, McGraw-Hill. 1970. New York: McGraw Hill. OL 5217786M. LCCN 75-102461.
  65. ^ Bassett 2012, p. 272: this meeting was dramatised in semi-fictional form for the BBC by Michael Ignatieff as Dialogue in the Dark.
  66. ^ Mossner 1980, p. 591.
  67. ^ Burton 1846, pp. 384–385.
  68. ^ Burton 1846, p. 436, footnote 1.
  69. ^ Smith, Adam. 1789 [1776]. "Letter from Adam Smith, LL.D. to William Strathan, Esq." pp. xix–xxiv in The History of England, from the Invasion of Julius Cæsar to the Revolution in 1688 1. London: Thomas Cadell and Longman. p. xxi.
  70. ^ a b c d e f g Hume, David. 1739. A Treatise of Human Nature 1. London: John Noon. Retrieved 19 May 2020.
  71. ^ Copleston, Frederick. 1999 [1960]. A History of Philosophy 6. Kent: Burns & Oats. ISBN 978-0-86012-299-9. Lay summary via Google Books. pp. 405–406.
  72. ^ Hume, David. 2007 [1748]. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, edited by P. Millican. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-152635-0. OCLC 314220887. pp. xii-xv.
  73. ^ a b Garrett, Don. 2002. Cognition and Commitment in Hume's Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-515959-2.
  74. ^ a b Allison, Henry E. 2008. Custom and Reason in Hume: A Kantian Reading of the First Book of the Treatise. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-953288-9.
  75. ^ Fieser, James. 2011. "David Hume (1711–1776)." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 19 May 2020.
  76. ^ a b Norton, David Fate. 1999 [1993]. "Hume, David." Pp. 398–403 in Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy (2nd ed.), edited by R. Audi. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved 18 May 2020. – via Gale.
  77. ^ Drefcinski, Shane. (1998). "A Very Brief Summary of David Hume." Dr. Shane Drefcinski. US: University of Wisconsin–Platteville. Archived 9 May 2017 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 19 May 2020.
  78. ^ Hume, David. 2010 [1778]. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. In Masterplots (4th ed.). pp. 1–3.
  79. ^ Kenyon & Craig 1985, p. ?.
  80. ^ Hume 1777, p. 26.
  81. ^ Atherton 1999, pp. 202–203.
  82. ^ Hume 1777, p. 111.
  83. ^ Hume 1777, p. 115.
  84. ^ Kenyon & Craig 1985, p. 254.
  85. ^ Harris 2004, p. 42.
  86. ^ Popkin 2014.
  87. ^ Read & Richman 2002, pp. 13–14, 69.
  88. ^ "Davidhume.org." Texts – An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding (1748, 1777). Web. 19 March 2017.
  89. ^ For this account of Hume's views on causation cf. Ayer (1946, pp. 40–42)
  90. ^ Hume 1739, p. 167.
  91. ^ Hume 1739, p. 78, original emphasis
  92. ^ Coventry 2006, pp. 91–92.
  93. ^ Hume 2011, p. 187.
  94. ^ Blackburn 1990, p. ?.
  95. ^ Quoted by Dauer (2010, p. 97)
  96. ^ Hume 1777, p. 78, fn 17.
  97. ^ Dicker 2002, p. 15.
  98. ^ Maurer 2013.
  99. ^ Ayer 1946, pp. 135–136.
  100. ^ Parfit 1984, p. ?.
  101. ^ Strawson 2011, p. ?.
  102. ^ Swain 2008, p. 142.
  103. ^ Giles 1993, p. ?.
  104. ^ Gopnik 2009, p. ?.
  105. ^ Garfield 2015, pp. 45, 107.
  106. ^ Mason, Michelle (September 2005). "Hume and Humeans on Practical Reason" (PDF). 31 (2). Hume Studies. Archived from the original (PDF) on 17 June 2016. Retrieved 27 May 2016. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  107. ^ Wallace, Jay (2014). "Practical Reason". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 29 April 2016.
  108. ^ Cranston 2014, p. 4.
  109. ^ Hume 1739, p. 458.
  110. ^ Hume 2013, p. 548.
  111. ^ Taylor 1965, p. ?.
  112. ^ a b Singer 2015.
  113. ^ Hume 1739, p. 470.
  114. ^ Edwards 2002, p. 44.
  115. ^ Humber 2008, p. 136.
  116. ^ Brown 2005, pp. 97–100.
  117. ^ Angier 2012, p. 114.
  118. ^ Gracyk 2011, ch. 1.
  119. ^ Hume 1739, Sect. VII and Sect VIII, pp. 295–304.
  120. ^ Costelloe 2013, p. viii.
  121. ^ Harris 2013, p. 401.
  122. ^ Schmidt 2010, pp. 325–326.
  123. ^ Scruton 2014, p. 18.
  124. ^ McKenna & Coates 2015, Ch. 3.
  125. ^ Russell 1995.
  126. ^ a b Wright 2010, p. ?.
  127. ^ Hume 1777, p. 81.
  128. ^ a b Passmore 2013, p. 73.
  129. ^ Hume 1777, p. 82.
  130. ^ Hume 1777, p. 95.
  131. ^ Hume 1777, p. 96.
  132. ^ Hume 1777, p. 98, original emphasis
  133. ^ Mounce & Mounce 2002, p. 66.
  134. ^ See e.g. Hobart (1934, p. ?) and Carroll & Markosian (2010, p. 54, note 11)
  135. ^ Strawson 2008, p. ?.
  136. ^ Prasad 1995, p. 348.
  137. ^ a b c Russel, Paul (2010) [2005]. "Hume on Religion". The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2008 ed.). Retrieved 19 May 2020.
  138. ^ O'Connor 2013, pp. 7–8.
  139. ^ a b c d Mullen, Shirley (2003). "David Hume and a Christian Perspective on History". Fides et Historia. XXXV: 49–60.
  140. ^ Mossner 1980, p. 206.
  141. ^ Russell, Paul; Kraal, Anders (2021), "Hume on Religion", in Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2021 ed.), Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, retrieved 31 May 2022
  142. ^ Scharfstein 1998, p. 454, footnote.
  143. ^ a b Hume, David. 1777 [1741]. "Of Superstition and Enthusiasm." Essay X in Essays Moral, Political, and Literary (1742–1754). Retrieved 19 May 2020. Archived. Also available: Full text and Liberty Fund edition.
  144. ^ Hume 1777, p. 51.
  145. ^ Hume 1757, p. 34.
  146. ^ Hume 1741, pp. 73–76.
  147. ^ Hume 1757, p. 63.
  148. ^ Reich, Lou (1998). Hume's Religious Naturalism. University Press of America. pp. 1–3, 41–42. ISBN 978-0-7618-0982-1.
  149. ^ Russell, Paul. 2008. The Riddle of Hume's Treatise: Skepticism, Naturalism, and Irreligion. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-975152-5.
  150. ^ O'Connor 2013, pp. 11, 19.
  151. ^ a b RE
  152. ^ Hume 1777, p. 148.
  153. ^ Loeb 2010, p. 118.
  154. ^ Madden 2005, p. 150, emphasis removed..
  155. ^ Hume 1779, p. 167.
  156. ^ Dennett 2009, pp. 620–621.
  157. ^ Bailey & O'Brien 2006, p. 101.
  158. ^ Hume 1777, pp. 110–111.
  159. ^ a b c Hume 1777, p. 113.
  160. ^ Hume 1777, pp. 116–131, Part II of Section X
  161. ^ Hume 1777, p. 119.
  162. ^ a b Bailey & O'Brien 2006, pp. 105–108.
  163. ^ Hume 1777, p. 110.
  164. ^ Ahluwalia 2008, pp. 104–106.
  165. ^ Hume 1777, p. 126.
  166. ^ An essay in answer to Mr. Hume's Essay on miracles. London : White. 1767. Retrieved 16 March 2017.
  167. ^ Levine 1989, p. 3.
  168. ^ Sherlock, Thomas (1809). The Trial of the Witnesses of the Resurrection of Jesus – Internet Archive. John Eliot. Retrieved 16 March 2017. witnesses Thomas SHerlock.
  169. ^ Paley, William; Nairne, Charles Murray (1858). "Paley's Evidences of Christianity: With Notes and Additions – William Paley, Charles Murray Nairne". Retrieved 16 March 2017 – via Google Books.
  170. ^ An essay in answer to Mr. Hume's Essay on miracles : Adams, William, 1706–1789. London : White. 1767. Retrieved 16 March 2017.
  171. ^ Douglas, John (1832). "The criterion: or, Miracles examined with a view to expose the pretensions ... – John Douglas, John Douglas (bp. of Salisbury.)". Retrieved 16 March 2017 – via Google Books.
  172. ^ Leland, John; Brown, William Laurence (1837). "A view of the principal deistical writers that have appeared in England in ... – John Leland, William Laurence Brown". Retrieved 16 March 2017 – via Google Books.
  173. ^ Campbell, George (1823). "A Dissertation on Miracles: Containing an Examination of the Principles ... – George Campbell". Retrieved 16 March 2017 – via Google Books.
  174. ^ Huitt, Kyle (25 December 2016). "Campbell, George". Library of Historical Apologetics. Retrieved 16 May 2020.
  175. ^ Hume 1777, p. 131, emphasis removed
  176. ^ MacKie 1982, p. 29.
  177. ^ Hume's History of England, vol, 6, p. 531 cited in Kenyon (1984, p. 42)
  178. ^ Jessop 2015.
  179. ^ Okie 1985, p. 16.
  180. ^ Okie 1985, p. 25.
  181. ^ Okie 1985, p. 27.
  182. ^ Wertz 1975, p. ?.
  183. ^ Roth 1991, p. ?.
  184. ^ Wertz 1993, p. ?.
  185. ^ Morris & Brown 2011, Chapter Life and Works.
  186. ^ Phillipson 2012, p. 131.
  187. ^ David Hume's Classical Liberalism, Thomas W. Merrill
  188. ^ So quoted in Livingston (1965)
  189. ^ Hume 1888, note 13 to letter LXXXIV.
  190. ^ Forbes 1985, p. 150.
  191. ^ Werner, John (1972). "David Hume and America". Journal of the History of Ideas. 33 (3): 439–456. doi:10.2307/2709045. JSTOR 2709045.
  192. ^ Wiley 2012, p. 211.
  193. ^ Hume 1741, p. 119.
  194. ^ Hume 1739, p. 550.
  195. ^ So quoted in Mossner (1980, p. 311), original emphasis.
  196. ^ Jerry Z. Muller, ed. (1997). Conservatism: An Anthology of Social and Political Thought from David Hume to the Present. Princeton U.P. pp. 25–26. ISBN 978-0-691-03711-0.
  197. ^ a b McArthur, Neil. 2007. David Hume's Political Theory: Law, Commerce, and the Constitution of Government. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. ISBN 978-0-8020-9335-6.
  198. ^ Adair 1957, p. ?.
  199. ^ Hume 1987.
  200. ^ Strauss, Leo; Cropsey, Joseph (2012). Strauss, L. and Cropsey, J., History of Political Philosophy. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-92471-7. Retrieved 16 March 2017.
  201. ^ Sabine, George H. 1973 [1937]. A History of Political Theory. US: Dryden Press. p. 603.
  202. ^ Robbins, Lionel A History of Economic Thought: The LSE Lectures edited by Medema and Samuels. Ch 11 and 12
  203. ^ Krugman, Paul (20 November 2012). "How We Know The Earth Is Old". The New York Times. Retrieved 21 November 2012.
  204. ^ Richards, H. Understanding the Global Economy, Peace Education Books, 2004, p. 322.
  205. ^ Hume, David. 1751. An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals.
  206. ^ Stewart, J. B. 2014. Opinion and Reform in Hume's Political Philosophy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. pp. 163–164.
  207. ^ Mayer, Thomas (1980). "David Hume and Monetarism". The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 95 (1): 89–101. doi:10.2307/1885350. JSTOR 1885350.
  208. ^ Nichols, Ryan, and Gideon Yaffe. 2014 [2000]."Thomas Reid." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford: Metaphysics Research Lab.
  209. ^ Savage, R. 2012. Philosophy and Religion in Enlightenment Britain: New Case Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 170.
  210. ^ Kant, Immanuel. 1783. "'Introduction." In Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics.
  211. ^ Schopenhauer, Arthur. The World as Will and Representation 2. Ch. 46, p. 582.
  212. ^ Ayer, A. J. (2001). Language, Truth and Logic. Penguin Books Limited. ISBN 978-0-14-191180-9. Retrieved 14 August 2019.
  213. ^ Einstein, Albert. 1998 [1915]. "Letter to Moritz Schlick." The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein 8A, edited by R. Schulmann, A. J. Fox, and J. Illy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. p. 220.
  214. ^ Schwarzschild, Bertram, trans. 2004. "Albert Einstein to Moritz Schlick." Physics Today 58(12):17. doi:10.1063/1.2169428.
  215. ^ Popper, Karl. 1976. Unended Quest; An Intellectual Autobiography. ISBN 978-0-415-28590-2. pp. 95–96.
  216. ^ Popper, Karl. 2014 [1963]. Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. London: Routledge. p. 55.
  217. ^ Hodge, Charles. 1873. Systematic Theology. New York: Scribner, Armstrong, and Co. p. 43. [[iarchive:systematictheol00hodggoog/page/n59|]]
  218. ^ Schröter, Marianne. 2011. "Transformationen des Theologiebegriffes in der Aufklärung." pp. 182–202 in Evangelische Theologie an Staatlichen Universitäten: Konzepte und Konstellationen Evangelischer Theologie und Religionsforschung, edited by S. Alkier and H. Heimbrock. Göttingen.
  219. ^ a b Joas, Hans. 14 November 2013. "Religionsgeschichte als Religionskritik? David Hume und die Folgen" (lecture). Beyond Myth and Enlightenment. Vienna: Institut für die Wissenschaften vom Menschen. Title translation: 'Religious Studies as Criticism of Religion? David Hume and the Consequences'
  220. ^ Penelhum, T. 2012 [1983]. Penelhum, T. (2012). Skepticism, Parity, and Religion: The Case of Hume. Springer. ISBN 978-94-009-7083-0. pp. 120–145 in God and Skepticism: A Study in Skepticism and Fideism. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing.
  221. ^ de:Friedrich Wilhelm Graf: Von David Hume ließ er sich nicht die Butter vom Brot nehmen – Ein Ausweis der aufgeklärten protestantischen Theologenelite ist wieder zugänglich: Johann Joachim Spalding in vorzüglicher Edition (Spalding never let Hume get the better of him, about a new edition of a mainstake of the enlighted protestant theological elite), review of Graf of a new edition of Spaldings works, in Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung Feuilleton, print version Nr. 249 / Page 39, 27 October 2003
  222. ^ Whelan, FG., Hume and Machiavelli: Political Realism and Liberal Thought, Lexington Books, 2004, p. 163.
  223. ^ a b Miles, T. 2009. "Hume: Kierkegaard and Hume on reason, faith, and the ethics of philosophy." In Kierkegaard and the Renaissance and Modern Traditions: Philosophy, edited by J. B Stewart. London: Ashgate Publishing. p. 27.
  224. ^ Berlin, Isaiah. 2013. "Hume and the Sources of German Anti-Rationalism." pp. 204–235 in Against the Current: Essays in the History of Ideas (2nd ed.). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  225. ^ Berlin, Isaiah. 11 May 2014. "Impressions of David Hume" (podcast episode). Philosophy Now Radio Show 34, hosted by G. Bartley.
  226. ^ Jessop, T. E. (1955). "David Hume Biography". Biography Online. 175 (4460): 697–698. Bibcode:1955Natur.175..697J. doi:10.1038/175697a0. S2CID 4187913.
  227. ^ Fodor, Jerry A. Hume Variations. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 135.
  228. ^ "Campaign to rename Edinburgh University building named after David Hume wins Students' Union support". Edinburgh News. Retrieved 18 September 2020.
  229. ^ "Hume disciples back name change for university tower". The Times. Retrieved 18 September 2020.
  230. ^ Millie Lord (28 September 2020). "Renaming DHT was a necessary antiracist step, but only the first of many". The Student. Archived from the original on 13 January 2021. Retrieved 30 September 2020.
  231. ^ Immerwahr, John (1992). "Hume's Revised Racism". Journal of the History of Ideas. 53 (3): 481–486. doi:10.2307/2709889. ISSN 0022-5037. JSTOR 2709889. In 1753 Hume revised his essay "Of National Characters" by adding the following footnote: 'I am apt to suspect the negroes and in general all other species of men (for there are four or five different kinds) to be naturally inferior to the whites. There never was a civilized nation of any other complexion than white, nor even any individual eminent either in action or speculation. No ingenious manufactures amongst them, no arts, no science...'
  232. ^ Hume, David. 1741. Essays Moral, Political, and Literary 1. Retrieved 19 May 2020. Archived. See also Liberty Fund edition.
  233. ^ Hume, David. 1993 [1742]. "Of Essay Writing," translated by F. Grandjean. Mauvezin, France: Trans-Europ-Repress.
  234. ^ Sampson, George (1943). "Samson, G., The Concise Cambridge History of English Literature, CUP Archive, 1941, p. 548". Retrieved 16 March 2017.
  235. ^ Smith, Adam. 1789. The History of England, from the Invasion of Julius Cæsar to the Revolution in 1688 1. London: Thomas Cadell and Longman.
  236. ^ Berry, Christopher J.; Paganelli, Maria Pia; Smith, Craig (2013). The Oxford Handbook of Adam Smith. Oxford University Press. p. 466. ISBN 978-0-19-960506-4. Retrieved 16 March 2017.
  237. ^ ESSAYS ON SUICIDE AND THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL http://public-library.uk/ebooks/47/13.pdf

Bibliography

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
  • Adamson, Robert; Mitchell, John Malcolm (1911). "Hume, David" . Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 13 (11th ed.). pp. 876–884.
  • Ardal, Pall (1966). Passion and Value in Hume's Treatise, Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press.
  • Bailey, Alan & O'Brien, Dan (eds.) (2012). The Continuum Companion to Hume, New York: Continuum.
  • Bailey, Alan & O'Brien, Dan. (2014). Hume's Critique of Religion: Sick Men's Dreams, Dordrecht: Springer.
  • Beauchamp, Tom & Rosenberg, Alexander (1981). Hume and the Problem of Causation, New York, Oxford University Press.
  • Beveridge, Craig (1982), review of The Life of David Hume by Ernest Campbell Mossner, in Murray, Glen (ed.), Cencrastus No. 8, Spring 1982, p. 46, ISSN 0264-0856
  • Campbell Mossner, Ernest (1980). The Life of David Hume, Oxford University Press.
  • Gilles Deleuze (1953). Empirisme et subjectivité. Essai sur la Nature Humaine selon Hume, Paris: Presses Universitaires de France; trans. Empiricism and Subjectivity, New York: Columbia University Press, 1991.
  • Demeter, Tamás (2012). "Hume's Experimental Method". British Journal for the History of Philosophy. 20 (3): 577. doi:10.1080/09608788.2012.670842. hdl:11858/00-001M-0000-002A-7F3A-B. S2CID 170120193.
  • Demeter, Tamás (2014). "Natural Theology as Superstition: Hume and the Changing Ideology of Moral Inquiry." In Demeter, T. et al. (eds.), Conflicting Values of Inquiry, Leiden: Brill.
  • Garrett, Don (1996). Cognition and Commitment in Hume's Philosophy. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Gaskin, J.C.A. (1978). Hume's Philosophy of Religion. Humanities Press International.
  • Harris, James A. (2015). Hume: An Intellectual Biography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Hesselberg, A. Kenneth (1961). Hume, Natural Law and Justice. Duquesne Review, Spring 1961, pp. 46–47.
  • Kail, P. J. E. (2007) Projection and Realism in Hume's Philosophy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Kemp Smith, Norman (1941). The Philosophy of David Hume. London: Macmillan.
  • Narveson, Jan; Trenchard, David (2008). "Hume, David (1711–1776)". In Hamowy, Ronald (ed.). Nozick, Robert (1938–2002). The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; Cato Institute. pp. 230–231. doi:10.4135/9781412965811.n220. ISBN 978-1412965804.
  • Norton, David Fate (1982). David Hume: Common-Sense Moralist, Sceptical Metaphysician. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  • Norton, David Fate & Taylor, Jacqueline (eds.) (2009). The Cambridge Companion to Hume, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Radcliffe, Elizabeth S. (ed.) (2008). A Companion to Hume, Malden: Blackwell.
  • Rosen, Frederick (2003). Classical Utilitarianism from Hume to Mill (Routledge Studies in Ethics & Moral Theory). ISBN 978-0-415-22094-1
  • Russell, Paul (1995). Freedom and Moral Sentiment: Hume's Way of Naturalizing Responsibility. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Russell, Paul (2008). The Riddle of Hume's Treatise: Skepticism, Naturalism and Irreligion. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Stroud, Barry (1977). Hume, London & New York: Routledge. (Complete study of Hume's work parting from the interpretation of Hume's naturalistic philosophical programme).
  • Wei, Jua (2017). Commerce and Politics in Hume’s History of England, Woodbridge: Boydell and Brewer online review
  • Willis, Andre C (2015). Toward a Humean True Religion: Genuine Theism, Moderate Hope, and Practical Morality, University Park: Penn State University Press.
  • Wilson, Fred (2008). The External World and Our Knowledge of It : Hume's critical realism, an exposition and a defence, Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
[edit]