Archetypes of Wisdom
Douglas J. Soccio
Chapter 10
The Skeptic: David Hume
Learning Objectives
On completion of this chapter, you should be able to answer
the following questions:
What is skeptic?
What is empiricism?
What is the “epistemological
turn”?
What is the correspondence
theory of truth?
How do primary qualities differ
from secondary qualities?
What is idealism
(immaterialism)?
What is “epistemological
dualism”?
What is the difference between
impressions and ideas?
What is the “empirical criterion
of meaning”?
What is the bundle theory of the
self?
What is inductive reasoning?
Modern Skepticism
A skeptic is a person who demands clear, observable,
indubitable evidence before accepting any knowledge
claim as true.
Skepticism (from the Greek skeptesthai, meaning “to
consider or examine”) refers to both a school of
philosophy and a general attitude.
Modern skepticism is primarily involved with
epistemological issues.
The study of the theory of knowledge, epistemology, is the
branch of philosophy concerned with the origins, quality,
nature, and reliability of knowledge.
Modern Empiricism
Attempts to answer fundamental epistemological questions
gave rise to the two major orientations of modern
philosophy: rationalism (Ch. 9) and empiricism (from the
Greek root empeiria, meaning “experience”).
Empiricists believe that all ideas can be traced back to
sense data, and that reason is unable to provide knowledge
of reality (as rationalists claim); such knowledge can only
be derived from experience.
Because its three founding philosophers were all British, it
has come to be called British empiricism.
John Locke
The earliest of the three British empiricists, John Locke
(1632-1704), was disturbed by the confusion surrounding
seventeenth-century philosophy and theology.
Educated as a physician, Locke was aware of the great
changes and progress being generated by science. He also
realized that you cannot “wait until you have reached
mathematical certainty about the correct treatment” before
helping a patient. You have observe and act based on what
you perceive.
In the winter of 1670, Locke had a series of philosophical
discussions which convinced him that what was necessary
first was to make clear the process of forming ideas and
gaining knowledge.
Experience is the
Origin of All Ideas
Twenty years later, in 1690, Locke published An Essay
Concerning Human Understanding.
In this work, he attempted to explain why philosophical
discussions often lead to misunderstandings and confusion.
This essay established the groundwork for empiricism as it
is generally understood today.
According to Locke, all ideas originate in sensation and
reflection. Specifically, we can think about things only
after we have experienced them. In other words, all ideas
originate from sense data.
Copy Theory
Locke insisted that all ideas are copies of the things that
caused the basic sensations on which they rest.
This position is known as the “copy theory.”
It is also referred to as “representation theory,” or
“correspondence theory of truth” (i.e., an idea is true if
what it refers to – corresponds to – actually exists).
Locke’s Rejection of
Innate Ideas
Unlike Descartes, Locke rejected the theory of innate – or
a priori – ideas.
He even accused the rationalists of labeling their pet ideas
“innate” in order to convince others to accept them
secondhand, without question.
Locke suggested that the mind is better compared to an
empty pantry, waiting to be stocked by experience.
He most famously described the mind at birth as a
completely blank tablet, or clean slate – tabula rasa, to use
the Latin equivalent.
Locke’s Dualism
Although Locke rejected Descartes’ theory of innate ideas,
he did agree with Descartes that “something substantial”
underlies and holds together the sensible qualities of
experience.
According to Locke, the substance that holds “extended
things” together is matter.
The same thing happens with respect to a “thinking
substance,” or mind.
Thus, Locke affirms the existence of two substances:
matter and mind.
Qualities
Material objects have primary qualities (shape, size,
location, etc.) which are independent of a perceiver and
thus, are objective.
Secondary qualities (color, sound, taste, texture) depend on
a perceiver and so, are subjective.
So, Locke’s dualism is between “the object as it is” and
“the object as we know it,” between the knower and the
known.
Locke’s Egocentric
Predicament
Epistemological dualism is the view that knowing
contains two distinct aspects: knower and known.
The predicament: If all knowledge comes in the form of
my own ideas, how can I verify the existence of anything
external to them?
Locke’s epistemological dualism leads to his falling into
the egocentric predicament.
George Berkeley
George Berkeley (1685-1753) was an Anglican Bishop
who posed one of the most quoted and least understood
questions in the history of ideas:
Does a tree falling in the forest make a sound if no one
is there to hear it?
Berkeley’s answer is “no,” and it is based on a clear sense
of the predicament Locke’s empiricism generated.
If all we can be sure of is what we actually experience,
then only our experiences, our ideas, and mental states are
certain.
Immaterialism
Berkeley extended Locke’s empiricism to claim that the
material world does not exist.
This makes Berkeley an idealist, or immaterialist.
The very idea of matter existing without mental properties
is self-contradictory for an empiricist.
To Be Is To Be Perceived
What Berkeley means is that it is absurd to posit an
independent, external reality, for if it exists, we cannot
have anything to do with it. If we experience things only
as ideas, we cannot talk of anything but them.
This leads Berkeley to his famous saying:
“Esse est percipi” (To be is to be perceived).
As for the falling tree, in Three Dialogues Between Hylas
and Philonous (1713), Berkeley points out that there is no
difference between sound as perceived by us and sound as
it is in itself. We may define sound in terms of what is
perceived – sensations, atmospheric disturbances, decibels,
waves, etc. – but in all cases sound remains something that
is perceived.
David Hume,
The Scottish Skeptic
The Scottish Skeptic, David Hume (1711-1776), stands
out in the history of ideas for the fearless consistency of
his reasoning.
Born in Edinburgh, and raised under a strict Presbyterian
regimen, he enrolled in the University of Edinburgh when
he was twelve years old.
After three years, he dropped out without a degree,
planning to devote himself to philosophy and literature.
A short time later, Hume admitted he had lost the faith of
his childhood, writing that once he read Locke and other
philosophers, he never again “entertained any belief in
religion.”
The Skeptical Masterpiece
In 1737, after studying with the Jesuits in France (at
Descartes’ old college in La Flèche), Hume returned to
England, hoping to publish the first two books of his
powerful and disturbing Treatise of Human Nature.
After objections from the publisher, a censored version
was published anonymously, with compelling arguments
against supernatural reality and personal immortality.
The uncensored version reduces reason to the “slave of the
passions” and alters the conventional picture of the nature
of science by denying cause and effect as they are
generally understood. This version understandably
sparked a great deal of controversy – which is arguably
why it was not published until after Hume’s death.
Dialogues Concerning
Natural Religion
In 1751, Hume wrote the most devastating, direct, and
irreverent of his works, the Dialogues Concerning Natural
Religion.
In his Dialogues, Hume mounts an unrelenting attack on
the argument from design and other attempts to
demonstrate the existence of, or understand the nature of,
God.
Hume did not deny the existence of God – a position
known as atheism; rather, he adopted the agnostic view
that we do not know enough to assert or deny the existence
of God.
Hume’s Skeptical Empiricism
Hume found most metaphysical speculation irrelevant to
the lives of ordinary people.
He thought such “abstract speculation” was useful only to
individuals with some theological motive, who, “being
unable to defend their views on fair grounds, raise these
entangling brambles to cover and protect their
weaknesses.”
Hume’s empirical criterion of meaning holds that all
meaningful ideas can be traced to sense experience
(impressions).
Beliefs that cannot be reduced to sense experience are
technically not “ideas” at al, but meaningless utterances.
The Self
Applying his empirical criterion of meaning, Hume argues
that we do not have any idea of the self as it is commonly
understood.
That is, we have no impression of the self “itself.”
If we have no impression of the self, what are we?
According to Hume, if there is no underlying, constant
“thing” to unite our sensory perceptions, then the “self” is
nothing more than a bundle of such perceptions.
While Hume’s bundle theory of the self is difficult for
most of us to accept, it is also very hard to refute.
Identity and Continuity
What is true of the self, is also true of other “things.”
According to Hume, identity is not a property of things,
but a mental act. Our minds confer identity on things; we
do not perceive it. Like the “self,” a “thing” is merely a
habitual way of discussing certain perceptions.
In the same way, Hume says that we “feign” or fabricate
continuity. I assume that because my face looks “the
same” this morning as yesterday morning, it has existed
continuously all night and at other times when I had no
perception of it.
But his point is that we have no direct impression of cause
and effect, the link between perceptions that would make
our assumptions about identity and continuity certain.
The Limits of Reason
If the mind creates the ideas of causality and necessity,
then “reason alone” can never be our guide.
Instead, Hume had another theory:
“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.”
Hume’s claim means that there are limits to reason which
we have not acknowledged before.
These limits have consequences for science, theology and
ethics.
The Limits of Science
Scientific reasoning rests on a pattern of inductive
reasoning, which results in generalized rules or principles.
Induction is a matter of reasoning from the particular to
the general, from “some” to “all.”
Scientists assume that inductive inferences are reliable
because they identify causal patterns. Before Hume,
cause and effect were defined in terms of a necessary
connection.
After Hume, the best we can do is take for granted that the
future will resemble the past, so there is no way to prove
the certainty of our predictions.
The Limits of Theology
Given his radical view of cause and effect, it is not
surprising that Hume rejected all efforts to use causality to
prove the existence of God.
The cosmological argument and the argument from motion
were meaningless for him.
The ontological argument was meaningless as well,
because the very qualities ascribed to God – perfection,
omniscience, omnipotence, and so forth – do not
correspond to specific impressions. They are empty
noises.
The Limits of Ethics
Hume insisted that morality is grounded in sentiment, not
reason. But he did not deny that reason has a role to play
in making moral judgments. That role, however, is
secondary to sentiment, or the passions.
Hume makes a crucial distinction between facts and
values. Reason can tell us the facts – what is the case. But
only sentiment (feelings, emotions) can tell us what ought
to be the case.
In all cases of moral judgment, virtues are traits that we
find agreeable (there can even be facts about such things.
But moral virtue is always a matter of liking or approval,
while moral vice is a matter of disliking or disapproval.
Reason can only help us get what we want.
Discussion Questions
Take a moment to reconsider the Argument from Design
(Ch. 8) and Hume’s critique of the Argument from Design.
In light of modern-day horrors (such as chemical warfare,
environmental disasters, AIDS, crack babies, crime rates,
world hunger, and homelessness), could there exist a
perfect designer?
Do you think such examples refute the notion of design?
Of intelligent design?
Chapter Review:
Key Concepts and Thinkers
Skeptic
Epistemology
Empiricism
Correspondence Theory of
Truth
A priori
Innate ideas
Tabula Rasa
Primary qualities
Secondary qualities
Epistemological dualism
Egocentric predicament
Idealist/immaterialist
Esse est percipi
Empirical criterion of meaning
Bundle theory of the self
Inductive reasoning
David Hume (1711-1776)
John Locke (1623-1704)
George Berkeley (1685-1753)