HUME’S MITIGATED SKEPTICISM WITH REGARD TO THE SYSTEMS OF REALITY
Keywords:
Mitigated skepticism, Double-existence theory, Realism, HumeAbstract
In this paper, I argue that Hume’s commitment to mindindependent
objects is based on two types of realism or system of realities: (a) a
naïve realism based on an unjustified vulgar belief which identifies perceptions
and objects, and (b) a representational realism or philosophical system of doubleexistence.
Firstly, I emphasize that the philosophical question “Whether there
be body or not” cannot be considered a full case of unmitigated skepticism,
because Hume accepts a mitigated skepticism compatible with both vulgar and
representational realism. Furthermore, I argue that, while the vulgar belief in
bodies is based on an unjustified assent, the double-existence theory is based
on both an unjustified assent and a rationally justified assent (that corrects
the former). Considering all these points, I conclude that Hume’s mitigated
skepticism allows and requires a belief in or supposition of continued and distinct existences, and that this must, as a practical matter, take vulgar and philosophical forms at different times.
Downloads
References
AINSLIE, D. “Hume’s True Scepticism”. Oxford University Press, 2015.
BAXTER, D. “A Pyrrhonian Interpretation of Hume on Assent.” In: Skepticism from
antiquity to the present. Edited by D. E. Machuca and B. Reed. Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, 2018. pp. 380-394.
______. “Identity, Continued Existence, and the External World.” In: S. Traiger (ed.), The Blackwell Guide to Hume’s Treatise, pp. 114–132. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2006.
______. “Hume’s Difficulty: Time and Identity in the ‘Treatise’”. London: Routledge, 2008.
BEEBEE, H. “Hume on Causation”. New York: Routledge, 2006.
CICERO, M. T. “On academic skepticism. Charles Britain”. Published by Hackett Publishing Company: Indianapolis, 2006.
DURLAND, K. “Extreme Skepticism and Commitment in the Treatise.” Hume Studies, 37.1, 2011, pp. 65–98.
FOGELIN, R. “Hume’s Skeptical Crisis”. Published by Oxford University Press, New York, 2009.
______. “Hume’s Skepticism in the Treatise of Human Nature”. London: Routledge, 1985.
GARRETT, D. “‘A Small Tincture of Pyrrhonism’: Skepticism and Naturalism in Hume’s Science of Man.” In: W. Sinnott-Armstrong (ed.) Pyrrhonian Skepticism, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.
______. “Hume’s Conclusions in ‘Conclusion of This Book’.” In: S. Traiger (ed.) The Blackwell Guide to Hume’s Treatise, Oxford: Blackwell, 2006.
______. “Cognition and Commitment in Hume’s Philosophy”. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.
HAKKARAINEN, J. “Hume’s Scepticism and Realism.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy, Vol. 20, Nr. 2, 2012, pp. 283–309.
______. “Hume’s Scepticism and Realism – His Two ‘Profound’ Arguments against the Senses in An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding”. Tampere: Acta Universitatis Tamperensis, 2007.
HUME, D. (1977). “Enquiry concerning Human Understanding”. T. Beauchamp (ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.
______. “A Treatise of Human Nature: A Critical Edition (1739–40)”. Vol. 1, ed. D. F. Norton and M. J. Norton: Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2007.
KAIL, P. “Conceivability and Modality in Hume: A Lemma in an Argument in Defense of Skeptical Realism”. Hume Studies, Vol. XXVIX, Nr. 1, 2003, pp. 43-61.
______. “Projection and Realism in Hume’s Philosophy”. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.
LOCKE, J. “An Essay Concerning Human Understanding”. Ed. P.H. Nidditch, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975.
MAIA NETO, J. R. “The Skeptical Cartesian Background of Hume’s “Of The Academical or Sceptical Philosophy”.” (First Inquiry, Section 12). Kriterion, Belo Horizonte, Nr. 132, 2015, pp. 371-392.
MILLICAN, P. “Against the ‘New Hume’”. In: READ, R. The New Hume Debate. 3. London: Routledge, 2007, pp. 211-252.
POPKIN, R. H. “David Hume: His Pyrrhonism and His Critique of Pyrrhonism”. The Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 1, Nr. 5, 1951, pp. 385-407.
RUSSELL, P. “Hume’s ‘Two Definitions’ of Cause and the Ontology of ‘Double Existence’”. Hume Studies, Vol. X, Nr. 1, 1984, pp. 1-25.
SMITH, N. K. “The Naturalism of Hume (I)”. Mind, Vol. 14, Nr. 54, 1905, pp. 149-173.
______. “The Philosophy of David Hume”. London: McMillan, 1941.
STRAWSON, G. “David Hume: Objects and power”. In: Real Materialism and Others Essays. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008. pp. 415-438.
______. “The Secret Connexion: Causation, Realism, and David Hume”. 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.
WINKLER, K. “The New Hume”. In: READ, R. (ed.). The New Hume Debate. 3. London: Routledge, 2007. pp. 52-87.
______. “Hume on Scepticism and the Senses”. In: D. C. Ainslie and A. Butler (eds.), Cambridge Companion to Hume’s ‘Treatise’ (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2015), pp. 135–64.
WRIGHT J. P. “Hume’s Academic Scepticism: A Reappraisal of His Philosophy of Human Understanding”. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 16, Nr. 3, 1986, pp. 407-435.
______. “The Sceptical Realism of David Hume”. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1983.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Revista Kriterion
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
