Hume, the sceptic and agnostic

Those who have a passion for philosophy have their own heroes. The philosophical hero of modern-day sceptics and empiricists is undoubtedly David Hume who lived from 1711 to 1776. He said all human knowledge is based on sense impressions. Anything not experienced is mere invention and it must be ruthlessly discarded. He denied the existence of the self, the objective existence of logical necessity, causation and even the validity of inductive knowledge itself.

Hume wanted to get rid of all falsehoods based on invention rather than experience. His objective was to found a philosophy of human nature. His Treatise on Human Nature was a painstaking study in experiential psychology in search of general principles. According to some philosophers, his philosophy is a devastating example of the power of logical critique.

He said that the self is an illusion and personal identity is nothing but the continuous succession of perceptional experience. Hume said, “I am nothing but a bundle of perceptions.” According to him, inductive reasoning leads to make generalisations from observing a number of similar cases. Although we often use the word “prove” in everyday life, strictly speaking, nothing can be proved. Even in a criminal case the charges must be proved beyond reasonable doubt.

Evidence

As far as philosophy is concerned, no amount of evidence is sufficient to prove a point because there is always the possibility of new, conflicting evidence. Once there was a theory that all swans are white. When some black swans were found in Australia the theory lost its value. So, just collecting a lot of data to support a theory is of limited value. A scientist or philosopher always looks for evidence to disprove a theory.

Unlike some other philosophers, Hume did not retract from his theory. He fearlessly defended his views against all odds. His powerful ideas destroyed many philosophical theories ruthlessly. Although Hume was a pleasant and lovable man, he used the sharpest philosophical axe to destroy opposing views.

Hume’s formative years probably had an impact on his life. When he was born in Edinburgh, Scotland, he was raised under a strict Presbyterian regimen. As a child he had to lead a religious life. When he was 12 years old, Hume was enrolled in the University of Edinburgh. However, after three years he left the university without a degree. Then he studied philosophy and literature. He also studied law and gave it up saying, “The law appeared nauseous to me.”

Sceptical mind

He did many jobs at different times but was focused on philosophy all the time. He had a questioning and sceptical mind. He spent some time with the Jesuits who saw in him a man who had no allegiance to anyone except his own experiences. When he wrote Treatise of Human Nature publishers refused to print it because of its “explosive content.” Then he removed some of the “objectionable” portions and published the book anonymously in 1739. When the book was published he was only 27.

In 1751 Hume wrote the most devastating treatise The Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion. In the book he mounted a concerted attack on the existence of God. He also wrote on history and politics. However, Hume made his mark not as a historian or political scientist but as a philosopher. Hume’s writings became more popular in France than in Scotland. When he went to France he was received as a cult figure. Aristocrats and women in high society in France loved him. When he returned to Scotland, his home became an intellectual salon for Scottish celebrities.

Even on his death-bed Hume did not show any signs of fear. Being an agnostic he did not deny the existence of God. He simply said that he did not know enough to assert or deny the existence of God. When James Boswell asked him whether he believed in a life after death, the dying sceptic said, “Not at all; it is a very gloomy thought.” A large crowd attended his funeral, despite heavy rain. Someone said, “He was an atheist.” Another man said, “No matter. He was an honest man.”

Most of us are curious to know what happens to the self or the soul when we pass away. Hume said there is no persistent identity for us. We speak of the oak tree in the backyard but each time we see it, it is different. That it changes its identity. This comes very close to the Buddhist view that everything is subject to change. A Greek philosopher put it succinctly, “Everything is in a flux. You cannot step into the same river twice because the river has changed.” The Buddha added a rider, “Not only the river but also your leg has changed.”