Take a photo of a barcode or cover
107 reviews for:
Enquiries Concerning the Human Understanding: And Concerning the Principles of Morals
David Hume
3.77 AVERAGE
107 reviews for:
Enquiries Concerning the Human Understanding: And Concerning the Principles of Morals
David Hume
3.77 AVERAGE
Fascinating I enjoyed Humes writing style. Like Lewis and many English writers, Hume opens with a proposition and a brief explanation then spends most of his time by defending from his detractors. Makes for more of a discussion rather than a disposition.
The main focus of the book is the origin of one’s knowledge and reasoning. Hume’s argument is the origin of all human understanding is the individuals experience of reality.
Other than the Treaty on Liberty and the Necessary (that is Free Will and Predetermination) and a few of the later chapters, I found all his arguments satisfying.
His chapter dunking on Skeptics is worth reading on its own too, though it’s not particularly novel.
The main focus of the book is the origin of one’s knowledge and reasoning. Hume’s argument is the origin of all human understanding is the individuals experience of reality.
Other than the Treaty on Liberty and the Necessary (that is Free Will and Predetermination) and a few of the later chapters, I found all his arguments satisfying.
His chapter dunking on Skeptics is worth reading on its own too, though it’s not particularly novel.
Best book on billiards I ever read.
Jokes aside, I can see why even some people with little patience for philosophy's pretensions maintain a fondness for Hume. He's by turns rigourous, meticulous, wistful, cheeky, and always with a self-reflexive humour that endears him to the reader. The subtlety with which he conceals his more atheistic arguments is also deeply impressive.
As usual, the OWC editorial material is extensive and well-selected. If you get as far as reading the editor's footnotes to Hume's own footnotes, you may find yourself with four bookmarks operating concurrently - I count myself lucky that I enjoy that sort of thing.
Jokes aside, I can see why even some people with little patience for philosophy's pretensions maintain a fondness for Hume. He's by turns rigourous, meticulous, wistful, cheeky, and always with a self-reflexive humour that endears him to the reader. The subtlety with which he conceals his more atheistic arguments is also deeply impressive.
As usual, the OWC editorial material is extensive and well-selected. If you get as far as reading the editor's footnotes to Hume's own footnotes, you may find yourself with four bookmarks operating concurrently - I count myself lucky that I enjoy that sort of thing.
After rereading this book and thinking about it some more. I completely misinterpreted the final sections of the book... I'd like to think about this more but it's definitely better than I initially thought. Still a bit confused with some of the earlier sections and feel that there may be more to the association of ideas...
The first philosophy book I can give 5 stars. I wish I had this as a young teen - it would have calmed and cleared my mind considerably. For a work over 250 years old, I was pleasently surprised by the style: for the most part he was direct, a little poetic, and with a wee bit of humour to help things along. His conquest of my heart got off to good start when he suggested that a lot of philosophy and writing done up to that point had been a wasted effort, as people simply hadn't defined their words properly. How can we have a Great Conversation without making sure we are talking about the same stuff?
He manages get an awful lot done in less than 100 pages: he clearly explains his ideas about experience, reasoning, causality, morality and religion, and unleashes the sceptic bombshell on the lot. I don't feel like he forced his ideas, but actually lays them out for full inspection, and for this he feels timeless. He admits the troubling truth that full scepticism can only lead to inaction, but that it seems to be our only reliable guide if we aim for pure truth. He ends by admirably shaking off the paradox-like bind, and happily revives common sense, restraining his scepticism to a more moderate range of enquiry thereafter - an invaluable point for a troubled, excited teen.
This sums it up for me nicely:
"Abstruse thought and profound researches I prohibit, and will severely punish, by the pensive melancholy which they introduce, by the endless uncertainty in which they involve you, and by the cold reception which your pretended discoveries shall meet with, when communicated. Be a philosopher; but, amidst all your philosophy, be still a man."
He manages get an awful lot done in less than 100 pages: he clearly explains his ideas about experience, reasoning, causality, morality and religion, and unleashes the sceptic bombshell on the lot. I don't feel like he forced his ideas, but actually lays them out for full inspection, and for this he feels timeless. He admits the troubling truth that full scepticism can only lead to inaction, but that it seems to be our only reliable guide if we aim for pure truth. He ends by admirably shaking off the paradox-like bind, and happily revives common sense, restraining his scepticism to a more moderate range of enquiry thereafter - an invaluable point for a troubled, excited teen.
This sums it up for me nicely:
"Abstruse thought and profound researches I prohibit, and will severely punish, by the pensive melancholy which they introduce, by the endless uncertainty in which they involve you, and by the cold reception which your pretended discoveries shall meet with, when communicated. Be a philosopher; but, amidst all your philosophy, be still a man."
Picked a really wrong time to read this book, I wasn’t able to pick up for weeks after I finished the first half! Couple of themes that stuck as read through this book: (1) Abstract reasoning can only be effective against numerical quantities and numbers as we can be certain about proposition invoking these things (2) Matters of fact that we discover through sensory impressions are developed primarily through cause and effect relationship we observe , we can never be certain about this as our discovery of such facts and our belief is strongly attached to frequency with which we see these conjoined events (3) So it’s really easy to confuse what-is with what-ought-to-be. (4) Empirical evidence is our best guide (5) Matters concerning knowledge and demonstration are squarely for objects in the domain of abstract reasoning.
Hume goes on to use “Whatever-is-May-not-be” I.e. you can never really understand the cause from the effect - to talk about religious belief.
I really need to read this book again!
Hume goes on to use “Whatever-is-May-not-be” I.e. you can never really understand the cause from the effect - to talk about religious belief.
I really need to read this book again!
Excellent edition of a brilliant text. The introduction by Peter Millican is first class too.
Hume's classic philosphical investigation into the nature and limits of human knowledge and its acquisition.
This book has two different views for me. First of the views isconcerning the contents. On it, Hume unleashes his tremendously abstract mind to tackle the 'understanding' of concepts, the concept of 'ideas' and the process of 'thinking' itself as well as digs into the concept of the skepticism. He does so in a tremendously deep, detailed and very ornamented style, even though he uses some lines to praise against this kind of philosophy, in my opinion he falls in the same trap (maybe is just I'm not used to way to use the language to express ideas in that century).
The other view of the book for me is the intense and deep study that Peter Millican gives us in this edition. Dissecting every part of the book and putting it into matter and time in few pages. Perhaps the best from the book is this study, that makes easier to understand Hume's mindset.
The other view of the book for me is the intense and deep study that Peter Millican gives us in this edition. Dissecting every part of the book and putting it into matter and time in few pages. Perhaps the best from the book is this study, that makes easier to understand Hume's mindset.
challenging
informative
reflective
medium-paced