Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T08:20:16.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hume, Empiricism and the Generality of Thought

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2013

KENNETH R. WESTPHAL
KENNETH R. WESTPHAL*
Affiliation:
University of East Anglia, Norwich
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Hume sought to analyse our propositionally-structured thought in terms of our ultimate awareness of nothing but objects, sensory impressions or their imagistic copies, “ideas.” The ideas of space and time are often regarded as exceptions to his Copy Theory of impressions and ideas. On grounds strictly internal to Hume’s Treatise, I argue that they are instead typical of Hume’s account of the generality of thought. This ultimately reveals the limits of the Copy Theory and of Concept Empiricism. The key is to recognise how very capacious is our (Humean) imaginative capacity to associate particular perceptions by various fine-grained determinable resemblances.

Hume a cherché à analyser notre pensée, structurée de manière propositionnelle, dans les termes de notre conscience ultime des seuls objets et impressions sensorielles ou de leurs copies imaginaires, les «idées». Les idées d’espace et de temps sont souvent considérées comme des exceptions à sa théorie des impressions et idées considérées comme des copies. Je soutiens ici que, pour des raisons strictement internes au Traité de Hume, elles sont au contraire typiques de la manière dont Hume explique la généralité de la pensée. Ceci me mènera à révéler les limites de la théorie de la copie et de la théorie empiriste du concept. Le point décisif consiste à reconnaître à quel point est vaste notre capacité imaginative (humienne) à associer des perceptions particulières à diverses ressemblances fines et déterminables.

Type
Articles
Information
Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review / Revue canadienne de philosophie , Volume 52 , Issue 2 , June 2013 , pp. 233 - 270
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Philosophical Association 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ainsley, Donald 2010 “Adequate Ideas and Modest Scepticism in Hume’s Metaphysics of Space.” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 92:39–67.Google Scholar
Árdal, Páll 1977 “Convention and Value.” In: Morice, G. P., ed., David Hume: Bicentenary Papers (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press), 51–68.Google Scholar
Badici, Emil 2008 “On the Compatibility between Euclidean Geometry and Hume’s Denial of Infinite Divisibility.” Hume Studies 34.2:231–244.Google Scholar
Baxter, Donald 2011 “Hume, Distinctions of Reason, and Differential Resemblance.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 82.1:156–182.Google Scholar
Beck, Lewis White 1978 Essays on Kant and Hume. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Berkeley, George 1710 A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge. Dublin: Pepyat.Google Scholar
Carnap, Rudolf 1928 Der logische Aufbau der Welt. Berlin: Weltkreis.Google Scholar
Costa, Michael 1988 “Hume on the Very Idea of a Relation.” Hume Studies 24.1:71–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cummins, Phillip 1991 “Hume on the Idea of Existence.” Hume Studies 17:61–82.Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald 1984 “A Coherence Theory of Truth and Knowledge.” In: Henrich, D., ed., Kant oder Hegel? (Stuttgart: KlettCotta), 423–38.Google Scholar
Dretske, Frederick I. 1981 Knowledge and the Flow of Information. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT/Bradford.Google Scholar
Falkenstein, Lorne 1979 “Hume on Manners of Disposition and the Ideas of Space and Time.” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 79:179–201.Google Scholar
Garrett, Donald 1997 Cognition and Commitment in Hume’s Philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Garrett, Donald 1998 “Ideas, Reason, and Skepticism: Replies to my Critics.” Hume Studies 24:175–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrett, Donald 2006a “Hume’s Naturalistic Theory of Representation.” Synthese 152:301–19.Google Scholar
Garrett, Donald 2006b “Hume’s Theory of Ideas.” In: Traiger, S., ed., The Blackwell Guide to Hume’s Treatise (Malden, Mass.: Blackwell Publishing), 41–57.Google Scholar
Harper, William 2011 Isaac Newton’s Scientific Method: Turning Data into Evidence about Gravity and Cosmology (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hume, David 1739–40 A Treatise of Human Nature. Cited as ‘T’ by Part.Book.Section. Paragraph numbers and by page numbers of Hume (1978).Google Scholar
Hume, David 1932 Greig, J. Y. T., ed., The Letters of David Hume. Oxford: The Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Hume, David 1978 SelbyBigge, L. A. and Nidditch, P. H., eds., A Treatise of Human Nature. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, designated ‘SBN’.Google Scholar
Hume, David 2000 Norton, D. F. and Norton, M. J., eds., A Treatise of Human Nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hume, David n.d. The Complete Works of David Hume. Past Masters electronic edition. Charlottesville, NC: Intelex Corp. (Contains Hume 1932, 1978.)Google Scholar
Johnson, Oliver 1995 The Mind of David Hume. Urbana, Ill.: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel 1902– Könniglich Preussische [now Berlin Brandenburgische] Akademie der Wissenschaften, Kants Gesammelte Schriften, 29 vols. Berlin: G. Reimer, now De Gruyter; designated ‘GS’.1781, 1786Kritik der reinen Vernunft. GS vol. 3 (second, rev. ed., cited as ‘B’) and 4 (first ed. to p. 405, cited as ‘A’).Google Scholar
Landy, David 2007 “A (Sellarsian) Kantian Critique of Hume’s Theory of Concepts.” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 88:445–457.Google Scholar
Leibniz, Wilhelm Gottfried von 1882 Gerhard, C. J., ed., Die philosophischen Schriften von Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, 6 vols. Berlin: Weidemann, rpt. Darmstadt: Olms, 1978.Google Scholar
Leibniz, Wilhelm Gottfried vonca 1705 (published 1765). Nouveaux Essais sur L’Entendement par L’Auteur du System de L’Harmonie preestabilie. In: ibid., vol. 5.Google Scholar
Leibniz, Wilhelm Gottfried von 1981 Remnat, P. and Bennett, J., eds. and trans., New Essays on Human Understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
George, Pappas 1977 “Hume and Abstract Ideas.” Hume Studies 3:17–31.Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. O. 1990 The Pursuit of Truth. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Read, Rupert, and Richman, Kenneth, eds. 2000 The New Hume Debate. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sellars, Wilfrid 1963 “Empiricism and the Philosophy of Mind.” Rpt. in: idem., Science, Perception and Reality (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul), 127–196.Google Scholar
Sellars, Wilfrid 1968 Science and Metaphysics. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Sellars, Wilfrid 1974 “Ontology and the Philosophy of Mind in Russell.” In: Nakhnikian, G., ed., Bertrand Russell’s Philosophy (London: Duckworth), 57–100.Google Scholar
Penner, Terry 1987 The Ascent from Nominalism. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Prinz, Jesse 2002 Furnishing the Mind. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT/Bradford.Google Scholar
2005 “The Return of Concept Empiricism.” In: Cohen, H. and Leferbvre, C., eds., Categorization and Cognitive Science (Oxford: Elsevier), 679–695.Google Scholar
Smith, Norman Kemp 1964 The Philosophy of David Hume. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Taylor, H. D., Knoche, L. and Granville, W. C. 1950 Descriptive Color Names Dictionary. Chicago: Container Corp. of America, http://people.csail.mit.edu/jaffer/Color/T.htmGoogle Scholar
Turnbull, Robert 1959 “Empirical and A Priori Elements in Broad’s Theory of Knowledge.” In: Schilpp, P. A., ed., The Philosophy of C. D. Broad (New York: Tudor), 197–231.Google Scholar
Wallgren, Thomas 2006 Transformative Philosophy. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield/Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Weinberg, Julius 1965 Abstraction, Relation, and Induction. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Westphal, Kenneth R. 1989 Hegel’s Epistemological Realism. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Westphal, Kenneth R. 1998 Hegel, Hume und die Identität wahrnehbarer Dinge. Frankfurt am Main: Klostermann.Google Scholar
Westphal, Kenneth R. 2004 Kant’s Transcendental Proof of Realism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Westphal, Kenneth R 2012 “Die positive Verteidigung Kants der Urteils- und Handlungsfreiheit, und zwar ohne transzendentalen Idealismus.” In: Ludwig, B., Brandhorst, M. and Hahmann, A., eds., Sind wir Bürger zweier Welten? Freiheit und moralische Verantwortung im transzendentalen Idealismus (Hamburg: Meiner), 259–277.Google Scholar
Westphal, Kenneth R 2013 “Kant’s Cognitive Semantics, Newton’s Rule Four of Experimental Philosophy and Scientific Realism Today.” In: Kant and Contemporary Theory of Knowledge, Kant Yearbook 5:000–000.Google Scholar
Wright, John 1983 The Sceptical Realism of David Hume. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar