27
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 43:
Line 43: + + + + +
no edit summary
::::: Comments?
::::: Comments?
::::: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 22:49, 17 September 2008 (EDT)
::::: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 22:49, 17 September 2008 (EDT)
::::::With regard to causation - there's no logical reason that things could not be only ''influenced'' by causes rather than entirely determined by them. However, you are left having to explain what it is providing the rest of the event (the part of the disease which is not genetically influenced). If it's randomness, then you are still left with the determined/random problem. If it is some third possibility, you would have to explain what this could be and how it would work.
::::::I think it's correct to say that Hume's approach is materialistic, although on a logical rather than ideological basis. What form would a 'spiritual component' take?
::::::Thanks by the way for the reply and for the continued discussion - it helps to sort out exactly what my arguments are to have them questioned coherently like that.--[[User:Sam99foster|Sam99foster]] 08:38, 19 September 2008 (EDT)
::::::P.S. I am not completely positive what Hume's precise rebuttal would be to your arguments, I'm just putting forward my view since I agree with Hume. I am however reasonably confident that I've expressed his view accurately.