> [Krimel]
> In response to Marsha's posting of the Libravox site I threw caution to
> the
> wind and elected to listen to Hume's Enquiry into Human Understanding. Low
> and behold I found that at the end of the book Hume had left a sort of
> post-it note that he must have intended for Ham. gav and few other might
> want to take note as well.
Taken out of context, a quotation can often be made to support an alien
viewpoint.
In Part I of his essay on "Sceptical Philosophy", Hume was talking about the
difference between objective knowledge and reasoning to philosophical
conclusions. He cites an example of the latter: "By what argument can it be
proved, that the perceptions of the mind must be caused by external objects,
entirely different from them, though resembling them (if that be possible)
and could not arise either from the energy of the mind itself, or from the
suggestion of some invisible and unknown spirit, or from some other cause
still more unknown to us?"
Your quotation, which comes at the end of Part III, is preceded by a short
paragraph which is clearly set in the context of reasoning on moral values
(Beauty is offered as an example). You omitted the first sentence of the
quoted paragraph containing the key phrase "persuaded of these principles"
by which Hume clearly is separating valuistic judgments from factual
knowledge ("objects of the understanding"). As joined together below, the
two paragraphs suggest that anyone seeking empirical facts about value
sensibility from metaphysical sources will be disappointed, which is
probably true.
"Morals and criticism are not so properly objects of the understanding as of
taste and sentiment. Beauty, whether moral or natural, is felt, more
properly than perceived. Or if we reason concerning it, and endeavour to
fix its standard, we regard a new fact, to wit, the general tastes of
mankind, or some such fact, which may be the object of reasoning and
enquiry.
"When we run over libraries, persuaded of these principles, what havoc must
we make? If we take in our hand any volume; of divinity or school
metaphysics, for instance; let us ask, Does it contain any abstract
reasoning concerning quantity or number? No. Does it contain any
experimental reasoning concerning matter of fact and existence? No. Commit
it then to the flames: for it can contain nothing but sophistry and
illusion."
In my opinion Hume was a minor contributor to philosophical thought. He was
basically an objectivist with an epistemological bent. His "skepticism"
(i.e., outright disdain) of metaphysics would have made him an unlikely
source of advice for an essentialist like myself, (not that I would have
welcomed it ;-).
But thanks for the reference, Krimel.
--Ham
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
