free essay on Hume and Kant on Causality

But it is not uncommon to see the claim that Kant actually denied this, and it is Kant, not Hume, who is typically belabored for implicitly prohibiting the development of non-Euclidean systems.

Sample Essay On The Topic Of Hume vs. Kant

Hume and Kant offered two differing views on morality.

Read this essay on Immanuel Kant and Hume, David

So far we have focussed on individual representations. For Kant,however, the representations that serve as the representational base ofconsciousness of oneself as subject are usually much‘bigger’ than that, i.e., contain multiple objects andoften multiple representations of them tied together into what Kantcalled ‘general experience’.

Comparing David Hume and Immanuel Kant Essay

For Kant, this distinction between consciousness of oneself and one'sstates by doing acts of synthesis and consciousness of oneself andone's states as the objects of particular representations is offundamental importance. When one is conscious of oneself and one'sstates by doing cognitive and perceptual acts, one is conscious ofoneself as spontaneous, rational, self-legislating, free—asthe doer of deeds, not just as a passive receptacle forrepresentations: “I exist as an intelligence which is conscioussolely of its power of combination” (B158–159), of “theactivity of the self” (B68) (Sellars, 1970–1; Pippin, 1987).

Modern Philosophy, Metaphysics, Philosophy and Film, Hume and Kant, Being and Knowing, Introduction to Philosophy
Seminar on Philosophical Writing, Late Modern Philosophy, Philosophy of Human Nature, Hegel, Kant, Hume, Kant and Sellars

Hume and Kant on causality: do their views really differ

Ultimately, of course, sentimentalism, along with all other attemptsto ground morality in material determining grounds, fails in Kant’sview. Kant has a lengthy list of related reasons why moral sensetheories are inadequate. No empirical principles can ground morallaws, because moral laws bind all rational beings universally,necessarily, and unconditionally; empirical principles are contingentin various ways, for example, on aspects of human nature (G4:442–43). Variance in moral feelings makes them an inadequatestandard of good and evil (G 4:442). Moral feelings cannot be thesource of the supreme moral principle, because the supreme moralprinciple holds for all rational beings, whereas feelings differ fromperson to person (M 29:625). If duty were grounded in feeling, itwould seem that morality would bind some people (e.g., thetender-hearted) more strongly than others, contrary to the universal,equal nature of moral obligation. Even if people were in completeagreement regarding their moral feelings, the universality of thesefeelings would be a contingent matter, and thus an inadequate groundfor the unconditionally binding moral law. Indeed, if morality weregrounded in feeling, it would be arbitrary: God could have constitutedus so that we would get from vice the pleasurable, calm feelings ofapproval that we now (allegedly) get from virtue (M 29:625). So forKant, the contingency of the ground of obligation offered by moralsense theories renders those theories inadequate; only a prioridetermining grounds will do.

Nevertheless, Kant is rarely credited, and Hume rarely faulted, for their views of the logic of the axioms of geometry.

Immanuel Kant - Friesian School

The antinomical choices between mystical intuitions as intellectual or sensible, of independent or identical objects, of a divine substance (personal or impersonal) or ultimate Emptiness, cannot be resolved on the evidence of mystical knowledge, since the knowledge of different mystics confirms each of these and, as Hume would say, the evidence of one tends to refute the evidence of the other.

Finally, I offer, in section 4, a philosophical assessment of the position attributed to Kant in sections 2 and 3.

Popular Essay Topics - Free Essays, Term Papers, …

The key distinction between Hume and Kant is largely pegged on their moral philosophies. Hume points out in his work, A Treatise of Human Nature, that morality is a subject of considerable interest. Hume believes that there exist a sole way to live, which is best for everyone. He, further, argues in his moral philosophy that an individual’s action can only be right when it produces good outcomes. His moral theory, therefore, arose from the belief that reason only can never trigger an action, rather feeling or desire cause action. Thus, since reason alone cannot cause action, Hume argues that our morality is premised in our feelings and thus virtue arises from an act that is based on the desire to help others. This implies that Hume’s moral theory is a virtue-centered morality as opposed to the natural law morality. His moral philosophy saws morality as originating from God.