Changes

==Hume's Skepticism==

==Hume's Skepticism==

-Causation-

===Causation===

Writing about [[metaphysics]], Hume charges most [[philosopher]]s with logical incontinence. He attacks the metaphysical principle of causation (the view that causal laws are necessary relations between events), arguing that there could be no sense impressions that would justify such a belief. All that we may infer from our senses are that certain events are "constantly conjoined." But the constant conjunction of X and Y does not logically imply a necessary connection between X and Y. For instance, we have always seen the sun rise in the morning, but we cannot show that it <i>must</i> do so tomorrow. For all we know, it shall not.

Writing about [[metaphysics]], Hume charges most [[philosopher]]s with logical incontinence. He attacks the metaphysical principle of causation (the view that causal laws are necessary relations between events), arguing that there could be no sense impressions that would justify such a belief. All that we may infer from our senses are that certain events are "constantly conjoined." But the constant conjunction of X and Y does not logically imply a necessary connection between X and Y. For instance, we have always seen the sun rise in the morning, but we cannot show that it <i>must</i> do so tomorrow. For all we know, it shall not.

It is important to note that Hume is not a radical skeptic. He is not worried that the sun shall not rise tomorrow; rather, he is simply remarking on our inability to have absolute certainty about the world based solely on our empirical observations of it.

It is important to note that Hume is not a radical skeptic. He is not worried that the sun shall not rise tomorrow; rather, he is simply remarking on our inability to have absolute certainty about the world based solely on our empirical observations of it.

-Enduring Objects-

===Enduring Objects===

We tend to believe that some objects endure over time and exist regardless of whether or not we currently perceive them. But, as Hume notes, if we are empiricists we cannot trace that belief to any impressions: it is a logical contradiction to say that we might have sense impressions of objects we do not perceive (a "perception" is the same thing as a sense impression). Thus, our belief in the endurance of objects seems to be a fiction. Again, however, it is important to note that Hume does not claim that objects have no existence external to the mind, or that objects do not in fact endure. Hume is just reminding us that we cannot claim to be certain of it.

We tend to believe that some objects endure over time and exist regardless of whether or not we currently perceive them. But, as Hume notes, if we are empiricists we cannot trace that belief to any impressions: it is a logical contradiction to say that we might have sense impressions of objects we do not perceive (a "perception" is the same thing as a sense impression). Thus, our belief in the endurance of objects seems to be a fiction. Again, however, it is important to note that Hume does not claim that objects have no existence external to the mind, or that objects do not in fact endure. Hume is just reminding us that we cannot claim to be certain of it.