No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
Abstract THE question of whether Hume is a sceptic and, if he is, what sort of sceptic he is, is probably the most vexed problem of the subtle subscience of Humeneutics. I will say at the outset that I think Hume is a sceptic, but a sceptic of an aberrant kind. I shall try in what follows to indicate what I take the nature of his scepticism to be, the place that it has in his philosophical system in the Treatise and the first Enquiry, and the extent to which it leads him into inconsistencies. I shall then attempt to use the results to interpret the Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion. There are still well-informed philosophers who find it odd that any one should even suggest that Hume is not a sceptic. To most students of philosophy the two paradigms of scepticism are the Descartes of the first Meditation and the Hume of the fourth and fifth sections of the first Enquiry. But it has come to be quite widely held that Hume’s views, rightly understood, are not sceptical at all.
Loading…
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.