You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
109 reviews for:
Enquiries Concerning the Human Understanding: And Concerning the Principles of Morals
David Hume
3.77 AVERAGE
109 reviews for:
Enquiries Concerning the Human Understanding: And Concerning the Principles of Morals
David Hume
3.77 AVERAGE
challenging
slow-paced
Is This An Overview?
Methods of science develop human society, but people are bound to narrow understandings. People have their biases, and nature limits self-control. The mind wants activity, but also moments of relaxation. People can image vast fictions and believe them to be reality. While mathematical sciences can form relations which never change, moral sciences maintain ambiguity. Logic is based on operations of the mind, for abstract ideas do not exist in nature. Experience teaches the cause and effect between variables. That the same causes have the same effects. Chance is dependent on ignorance of causes for events. Science can overcome controversy through experimentation, through trust in past experiences.
Caveats?
This book can be difficult to read due to antediluvian examples and explanations. Various ideas presented have been updated. Some ideas still hold, others have been proven false.
such an emotional ride, i have so many thoughts and feelings
challenging
mysterious
reflective
slow-paced
informative
medium-paced
There are many points of contention I have with Hume, however he does a good job expressing his ideas and building up his arguments.
I read this as an ebook, which while convenient I feel is not the best medium for texts that need to be read and understood slowly while taking notes. Nonetheless, I was impressed by Hume’s prose style and look very much forward to reading Kant and seeing how he addresses the difficult questions Hume raised.
slow-paced
5 star influence. 0 star read. Tone seems counter to his philosophy.
Seemed like just common sense a lot of it. But apparently he invented common sense. But I am a modern reader. A result of my condition. This book was boring as fuck. Repetition. Heavy on overexplaining logic. I feel like to point of logic is that its logical. Maybe I am just stupid. I actually agree with a lot of Hume's sentiments. Human's run on passion/emotion, so to be a man is to reject over rationalising everything. You see what I'm saying.
Seemed like just common sense a lot of it. But apparently he invented common sense. But I am a modern reader. A result of my condition. This book was boring as fuck. Repetition. Heavy on overexplaining logic. I feel like to point of logic is that its logical. Maybe I am just stupid. I actually agree with a lot of Hume's sentiments. Human's run on passion/emotion, so to be a man is to reject over rationalising everything. You see what I'm saying.
Hume goes so fucking hard. Final line: "Commit it then to the flames: for it cannot contain nothing but sophistry and illusion."
Hume's fork with which he ate
Hume's fork with which he ate
challenging
informative
reflective
slow-paced
informative
reflective
I've always had a hard time with philosophy; it all reads/sounds like circular arguments with demonstrations or examples that only prove the points in the circle. I gave this is shot because empiricism is more my path as I am rational and logical. Maybe it is because I listened to the audiobook at work, or maybe because these "deep thinkers" do not come across as "deep" to me that I cannot buy into this perception of human understanding.
I like data, I like root cause analysis, I like impact analysis. I like keeping emotions at bay when dissecting and analyzing issues or topics. I have learned that with humans, you can never discard emotions, some humans are incapable of separating their experiences from their emotions so Hume's separation of "ideas" and "sensations" is not realistic.
I'll go back to my eye rolling opinion that philosophy is just another way of saying ineffective.
I like data, I like root cause analysis, I like impact analysis. I like keeping emotions at bay when dissecting and analyzing issues or topics. I have learned that with humans, you can never discard emotions, some humans are incapable of separating their experiences from their emotions so Hume's separation of "ideas" and "sensations" is not realistic.
I'll go back to my eye rolling opinion that philosophy is just another way of saying ineffective.