Topic: Hume

Hume is one of the central figures of the empiricist tradition and
of the Enlightenment. Understanding Hume is key to understanding the
empiricist tradition and Kantian transcendental philosophy. Hume
made contributions of the first rank to metaphysics, philosophy of
mind, epistemology, ethics, aesthetics, psychology, economics and
finance theory, English history, and religious studies. The
interpretation of Hume is among the most contested in contemporary
history of philosophy. Some see Hume as a straightforward
development of the empiricism of Locke and Berkeley and even as an
idealist development of Berkeley, or an idealist predecessor of
Kant. Others see Hume as a "skeptical realist" deeply influenced by
continental rationalism and in particular by Malebranche. Hume has
been interpreted as a naturalist in epistemology, defining knowledge
in terms of what it is psychologically natural for us to believe. He
has been interpreted as a skeptic, either in the Academic tradition
or in the Pyrrhonian tradition. Some say his naturalism is
inconsistent with skepticism, and others say it is the basis for
skepticism. Some think that Hume was trying to rescue reason as the
key to human success, and others say he was trying to debunk it.
Some say Hume is the paradigmatic Enlightenment philosopher, and
others say he is a renegade in the Enlightenment. Some say Hume is
an atheist, others that he is a theist. Contemporary Hume studies is
one of the most tumultuous and exciting areas in contemporary
history of philosophy. We will try to discover the real Hume in all
of this, or whether there is a real Hume. Our primary concern will
be to get deeply into the metaphysics, philosophy of mind, and
epistemology. We will read with great care the Treatise of Human
Nature, Book I. We will spend less time on the theory of passions in
Book II and the ethics in Book III. We will read the Dialogues
Concerning Natural Religion very carefully. There will be constant
attention to Hume's predecessors (especially Locke, Malebranche, and
Berkeley) and occasional attention to his successors (mainly Reid).
I will not ask you to read large amounts of Locke or Berkeley.
Instead, I will supply summaries, outlines, and quotations from
Locke and others when I think you need to see where Hume is coming
from (or going to). It will help if you already know something about
the history of philosophy, especially modern philosophy (Descartes,
Locke, Berkeley). But I am determined to set up the course without
presupposing any knowledge of historical material. The strategy will
be to enable you to learn whatever is relevant as we go. I will
probably use a contemporary book interpreting Hume (or maybe two
books). The Hume secondary literature is very extensive and
wonderful. Two possibilities are these strikingly original
interpretations: John Wright's The Sceptical Realism of David Hume,
and Louis Loeb's Stability and Justification in Hume's Treatise.