No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
There are times in the history of ideas when two great schools of thought meet head on, so to speak, and a distinguished thinker representing one tradition explicitly names and carefully criticizes an equally distinguished representative of the other. At such times both ways of thought receive a concise, and even a dramatic form. In the early nineteenth century, a philosopher, whom Bergson once1 described as the greatest French metaphysician since Descartes and Malebranche, brought about such a collision by attacking Hume's philosophy of causation. His name was Frangois-Pierre Gontier, or Maine de Biran; and his criticisms of Hume on this subject lucidly summarize the great tradition of which Biran, was an important part, while they throw into clear relief the equally great tradition to which Hume belonged. In what follows, we shall outline both of these traditions, and discuss in general the role Biran and Hume played in each. The stage will then be set, but the agon will not yet have begun. The second part of our study will be an analysis of Biran's attack on Hume's philosophy; here the traditions we shall have discussed in necessarily general terms will be focussed upon a single, crucial point, viz., the meaning and cognitive role of experience. As we shall see, these two schools of thought are very much alive today; and so, studying Biran's critique of Hume will not only acquaint us with an important encounter that has not been sufficiently considered by historians of ideas, but it may also help make us more aware of the exact nature of the conflict between two contemporary ways of thinking.
Loading…
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.