The subjective idealism of David Hume and George Berkeley. Subjective Idealism J.

Berkeley's subjective idealism and D. Hume's agnosticism.

Berkeley's subjective idealism.

The doctrine created by Berkeley is subjective idealism. Rejecting the existence of matter, it recognizes the existence of only human consciousness, in which Berkeley distinguishes between "ideas" and "souls" ("minds"). His best works, in which he expounds his philosophy, were written by him in his youth, these are “An Experience of a New Theory of Vision”, “A Treatise on the Principles of Human Knowledge”, “Three Dialogues between Hylas and Philonus”.

In 1709, Berkeley published his "Experience in a New Theory of Vision". When creating this work, Berkeley is most concerned about the need to eliminate the idea of ​​primary qualities that are independent of our consciousness, supposedly confirming the reality of matter, namely, matter outside the mind. And the primary quality, especially after the works of Descartes, which won universal recognition, is the length of bodies. Berkeley publishes his "Experience ..." specifically with the aim of refuting the general preconceived (in his opinion) opinion. The result, according to Berkeley, successfully achieved, was to prove that the distance, size and position of objects are not at all primary, objective (that is, independent of the subject) qualities of objects, but rather our interpretations.

So the perception of distance does not reflect real distance; such perception does not convey the image of the real world, since the distance depends on the form of the subject's activity. Against this theory of vision, we could effectively use the rules of geometric optics, for which space, measured from a distance, would have to be combined with something objective. However, Berkeley reminds us that if these rules were valid, then it would follow that everyone's perception of distance should be the same. But it is obvious that things are different. The desire to explain vision "through geometry", according to Berkeley, is just a "fantasy" or "caprice".

It would also be a mistake to assume that the connection that unites visual impressions with tactile sensations refers, if not directly to external bodies, then to the nature of these things. According to Berkeley, the connection between different types of sensations belongs to the realm of logic and objectivity: it is only a matter of experience. Only the human soul establishes a connection between the "tips" of the diverse content of different types of sensations. Thus, the soul creates "things" and gives shape to "things". Both tactile sensations and visual representations (images) are signs of the language of nature, which God sends to the senses and reason so that a person learns to regulate his actions necessary to maintain life, and conform them to circumstances so as not to expose his life to danger. So vision is a tool for preserving life, but by no means a means of proving the reality of the external world. According to Berkeley, “objective reality arises before us only on the basis of interpretation, the interpretation of “signs” by sensations, the only ones known initially. And only when we establish a certain connection between different classes of perceptible mappings and consider their respective mutual dependence that has developed between them, only then can we consider that the first step in the construction of reality has been taken.

Hume's agnosticism.

Hume's theory of knowledge was formed as a result of his processing of the subjective idealism of J. Berkeley in the spirit of agnosticism and phenomenalism. Hume considered the impressions of external experience (sensations) to be primary perceptions, and the impressions of internal experience (affects, desires, passions) to be secondary. Considering the problem of the relationship between being and spirit to be theoretically insoluble, Hume replaced it with the problem of dependence simple ideas(i.e., sensory images) from external impressions. Rejecting the reflection in consciousness of the objective laws of being, Hume interpreted the formation of complex ideas as psychological associations of simple ideas with each other.

The central point of his epistemology, the doctrine of causality, is connected with Hume's conviction in the causal nature of association processes. Having posed the problem of the objective existence of causal (causal) connections, Hume solved it agnostic: he believed that this problem is unprovable, since what is considered a consequence is not contained in what is considered a cause, and is not similar to it.

Rejecting free will from the positions of mental determinism, Hume used this conclusion to criticize the concept of spiritual substance. Personality, according to Hume, is "... a bunch or bundle ... of various perceptions following one after another ...". Hume's critique of spiritual substance developed into a critique of religious faith, to which he opposed habits. everyday consciousness and a vague "natural religion".

Agnosticism is the most accurate definition of the main content of Hume's philosophy. The deviation from agnosticism in the Treatise on Human Nature, expressed in the construction of a dogmatic scheme of the spiritual life of man, was undertaken by Hume not to shake agnosticism, but, on the contrary, in order to implement the recommendations arising from it. And they consisted in the rejection of attempts to penetrate into objective reality and in the cognitive sliding on the surface of phenomena, i.e., in phenomenalism. In fact, this is just another name for Hume's agnosticism, but considered as a method

J. Berkeley - English philosopher (1685 - 1763). He criticized the concepts of matter as the material basis of bodies, as well as Newton's theory of space as the receptacle of all natural bodies, and Locke's doctrine of the origin of the concepts of matter and space.

The concept of matter is based on the assumption that we can form an abstract idea common to all phenomena general concept substances. People cannot have a sensory perception of matter, as such, because the perception of each thing decomposes without remainder into the perception of the sum of individual sensations or ideas of which each thing consists. Then it turns out that matter breaks up into whole line uncertainties that by themselves cannot influence anything. It turns out that: “To be means to be in perception.” What we consider to be material objects should have an abrupt existence: having suddenly arisen at the moment of perception, they would immediately disappear as soon as they fell out of the field of vision of perceiving subjects. But B. argued that the constant vigil of God, causing us ideas, everything in the world exists constantly.

Berkeley was not only a priest and philosopher, but also a psychologist. He argued that we perceive only the properties of things, i.e. how they affect our senses. But we do not grasp the essence of the thing itself. Sense impressions are phenomena of the psyche. At the same time, B. speaks of the relativity of our perceptions and the state of the subject
Berkeley, who openly opposed materialism, atheism and deism, rejects the objective basis of any qualities, in fact equating them to human sensations.
According to Berkeley, in reality, there are first of all "souls", God who created them, as well as "ideas" or sensations, as if put by God human souls. Berkeley reduces everything objective in the external world to the subjective: he identifies all things with "combinations" of sensations. For him, to exist means to be perceived. Berkeley declared that all things are in the mind of God
David Hume.

It was based on the premise that a person can judge anything only on the basis of the impressions that are in his mind, and going beyond the limits of consciousness, beyond the limits of the impression is theoretically illegal.

It turns out that impressions, perceptions fence off a person from the outside world. Hume fences himself off, therefore, both from the external world itself, shutting himself off in his knowledge, and from theories, according to which the very impressions of the subject reflect the external world. He does not accept the contention of the materialists that matter is the cause of perception, but he equally rejects the assertions of those who believe that the images of the world are given by God. The finite, external world exists, Hume believes, but we are not allowed to go beyond our own consciousness. Therefore, all sciences are reduced to one, to the science of the soul, to psychology.
Nothing can be accessible to our mind except the image of perception, it is not able to experience between the relationship of perception and object. Man knows environment through sensations, perceptions can be caused by atoms, god. Because we are dealing with perceptions, it is impossible to know the essence of the world.

Hume subjected the position of empiricism to a thorough analysis. Hume's conclusions about the possibilities of our knowledge are full of skepticism. However, this skepticism is directed against the metaphysical claims of our minds to know reality as it is in itself.
Knowledge is limited by the limits of experience, and only in them does it have true reality and value.

Hume believed that our feelings do not allow us to know the truth. Feelings are an unreliable source of knowledge. We do not have that criterion by which we could firmly cognize the world. Hume's philosophy turned out to be a kind of final point in the development of empiricism.

George Berkeley(1685 - 1753) was born in Ireland, graduated from the University of Dublin. Already in 1707 ᴦ. began teaching activities. Traveled later. I visited Paris and spent almost three years in America. In memory of the Irish philosopher-missionary, an American seaside town is named after the University of California. In 1734, upon his return to England, Berkeley was ordained a bishop of the Church of England.

Berkeley gave the empirical aspirations of his predecessors, in particular Locke, the most radical form. This radicalism is manifested primarily in his views on general ideas and abstract concepts. Locke denied that there were general and abstract objects in the outside world. At the same time, he recognized that abstract concepts exist in the mind. Berkeley also objected to this: there is nothing abstract in the mind, just as there is nothing outside the mind. No one, for example, has an abstract idea of ​​extension: one cannot imagine extension without this or that color, nor can one imagine ʼʼcolor in generalʼʼ. The color we represent must be either red, or yellow, or some other. An abstract idea, for example, the idea of ​​a triangle that is neither acute, nor right, nor equilateral triangle, is debatable. It is also impossible to imagine ʼʼmovement in generalʼʼ, ĸᴏᴛᴏᴩᴏᴇ would be neither slow nor fast. Berkeley declares the concept of infinitesimal quantities untenable in mathematics. Each drawn line consists of points and contains not an infinite, but a finite number of them. Division to infinity, according to Berkeley, is impossible for the simple reason that it has the limits of our perception. The limit of sensory perception is the limit of divisibility - this is his conclusion. For this reason, mathematics that operates on infinitesimal quantities is false, based on a misunderstanding. All his life, Berkeley opposed Newton's mechanics, since it was based on abstract concepts of absolute motion, space and time, in no way represented in sensory perception.

Berkeley, like Locke, is a sensualist, but an idealist. If Locke believes that sensory perception is the only source of our knowledge, then Berkeley argues that sensory perception acts as the only evidence of the existence of an object. If it follows from Locke's concept that we know only what we perceive with sense, then from Berkeley's concept there is a much more radical conclusion: only that which we perceive with sense really exists. If Locke limits the sphere of knowledge to sensory perception, then Berkeley's sensory perception already acts as the boundary of being.

Τᴀᴋᴎᴍ ᴏϬᴩᴀᴈᴏᴍ, in contrast to Locke, who believed that what is not perceived by our senses, we cannot know, Berkeley argued that what cannot be perceived by the senses does not exist at all. For things, according to Berkeley, ʼʼto beʼʼ always means ʼʼto be in perceptionʼʼ, things are complexes of sensations.

From theoretical premises - the denial of abstract concepts and the subjective-idealistic interpretation of sensations - follows the main thing that Berkeley is striving for: the abolition of the concept of matter as the material basis of bodies. According to Berkeley, the concept of matter is based on the assumption that we can, abstracting from the particular properties of things, form an abstract idea of ​​a material substrate common to them. But this, Berkeley believes, is impossible: we do not and should not have a sensory perception of matter as such; our perception of each thing decomposes without remainder into the perception of a certain sum of individual sensations.

Berkeley seeks not only to discredit the concept of matter ʼʼ as the most abstract and incomprehensible of all ideas ʼʼ. He seeks the destruction of the entire edifice of materialism. And here Berkeley is repelled by philosophy Locke, in particular, from his theory of primary and secondary qualities. Berkeley reworks this theory in the spirit of subjective idealism. Here he sets himself the task of abolishing the objective reality of the external world and affirming the idea of ​​the subjective nature of all qualities, both primary and secondary. Two realities, from his point of view - ϶ᴛᴏ too many. For a correct understanding of the world, one is enough. Berkeley comes from an old but very witty argument: ʼʼNothing can give another what he himself does not haveʼʼ. The world of our subjective perceptions is the mental world. He is reliable. We directly experience each of his impressions, and only logical tricks tell us that all our experiences are illusory. The world of external things, if it exists, is the physical world. How can a physical thing give rise to a psychic experience, how can it give to another what it does not itself possess?

Therefore, there are no two realities that have a different nature. There is only one reality - the psychic reality, the reality of our sense perception. Nothing is hidden behind our feelings. The only reality is ϶ᴛᴏ the reality of our sensations. There is only that which I sensually perceive, and it exists exactly as I perceive it. If it is red, then it is red; if it is round, then it is round. To exist means to be perceived!

As a result, Berkeley comes to conclusions that differ significantly from Locke's views. I see what exists, Locke says modestly. There is what I see, proclaims Berkeley, asserting himself as the center of the universe.

Τᴀᴋᴎᴍ ᴏϬᴩᴀᴈᴏᴍ, Berkeley returns to the world the colors and smells stolen from him by Locke, he overcomes the dualism of primary and secondary qualities, developing a peculiar concept of psychological monism. Only now the price of this is unreasonably high, since there are exactly as many such individual worlds as there are people, and at the center of each of them is the perceiver. given world and the subject that creates it. At the same time, the fact that material objects exist only when perceived, does not mean at all that these objects have an abrupt existence: they suddenly appear at the moment of perception and immediately disappear as soon as they fall out of the field of vision of the perceiving subject. The world does not cease to exist continuously, since there is not one, but many perceiving subjects in it. What is in given time not perceived by one person, it should be perceived by other people. Moreover, Berkeley argues that things cannot disappear if even all subjects disappear, because things will continue to exist as the totality of God's ideas. God is the ultimate guarantee for the continued existence of the world. God always perceives everything.

Berkeley's reference to God indicates that he could not, from the standpoint of consistent subjective idealism, give all the answers to the criticism of his opponents and was forced to back up his teaching with a "theological crutch", objective idealism, the recognition of the existence of a supra-subjective force in the face of God.

David Hume(1711 - 1776) was born in Scotland in a poor landowning family. He spent his childhood in the family estate, and school years in Edinburgh. For a long time he could not find a profession and vocation that suited him. Hume's relatives hoped that he, like his father, would become a lawyer, but, while still a teenager, the future philosopher declared that he was deeply disgusted with any occupation other than philosophy and literature.

Like Locke and Berkeley, Hume focused on developing the principles of sensationalism, but his answer to the question of what is the source of human sensations differed from both that offered by Locke and advocated by Berkeley. His own position can be expressed approximately as follows: whether the external world exists or it does not objectively exist at all as a source of our sensations, we cannot prove. It is not given to us to know what is behind our sensations, since our mind operates with their content, and not with what causes them. This is the specificity of his skepticism.

Hume proceeded from the fact that the source of all knowledge and all activity of the mind is the experiences or ʼʼmental perceptionsʼʼ of a person. These experiences come in two forms: primary perceptions - impressions of external experience (sensations) and secondary perceptions - sensory images of memory and imagination (representations, ideas). Primary perceptions are more lively, intense and vivid. These are perceptions that are realized directly when we see, hear, feel, etc. Secondary perceptions are less strong, they arise in the process of thinking. The relationship between these two types of experiences Hume decides quite unequivocally: secondary perceptions are copies, weakened reflections of primary perceptions. Οʜᴎ differ from each other in the same way that, for example, feelings of pain due to excessive heat or pleasure due to moderate warmth differ from those ideas that arise when we remember this. Primary impressions act not only as the starting point of knowledge, but also as a means of verifying the correctness of ideas. Hume's fundamental assertion is that "all our simple ideas, when they first appear, are derived from simple impressions which correspond to them and which they exactly represent". Thus, any possibility of innate ideas is rejected, and thinking is limited to connection, rearrangement, and generally processing of sensory experience.

While stating the wide popularity of the statement about the universal causal connection of phenomena, Hume does not find this statement intuitively reliable. He undertakes an analysis of the existing views on causality and comes to the conclusion that all the logical proofs cited in defense of the extreme importance for any phenomenon to have its own cause are erroneous and sophistical. Hume examines the basis on which we infer that a certain cause must have a corresponding effect of the utmost importance. It turns out that the composition of all our arguments regarding the causal relationship of phenomena includes impressions of memory and feelings, accompanied by faith. The idea of ​​the extremely important connection of cause and effect is based on the fact that in all the previous cases that we observed, certain phenomena followed each other, and we believe that this sequence of events will continue in the future. But on the basis of past experience, we have no right to draw conclusions about future events. The source of faith is only habit, which arises through repetition. It turns out that the assumption about the similarity of the future with the past is not based on evidence and follows solely from habit.

The search for causal inferences is an instinct given to us by nature. She gave us instinct, but did not give us understanding. We draw conclusions about future phenomena without knowing the basis of our conclusions, just as we move about without knowing about muscles. But instinct is not knowledge. Hence the conclusion: the principle of causality is not the appropriate basis for the cognition of reality.

Hume, like Berkeley, denies the concept of ʼʼsubstanceʼʼ, but does so more consistently. Hume directs his arguments not only against the existence of material substance, but also decisively opposes the concept of spiritual substance. In consciousness, he believed, there is nothing else but the content of impressions and ideas that have no objective carrier, incl. and spiritual. It seems to us that our Self is a substance, that it exists and continues to exist regardless of perceptions and feelings, but all this is a delusion. When I delve more precisely into what I call I, Hume reflects, I always stumble upon only one or another concrete perception, and I never observe anything other than perceptions. It is only by virtue of habit that we consider ourselves the same throughout our lives, despite the constantly changing stream of our psychological states.

The denial of the existence of a spiritual substance creates a philosophical prerequisite for a skeptical attitude towards any religion. Religion is based not on reason, but on instincts. Fundamental religious performances, as Hume believed, are generated by the fear of death and fears about the future. True, Hume believes that religion, despite the fact that it has often been the cause of wars and strife, still retains importance in the life of society, because it affirms and ensures the effectiveness of moral norms.

Τᴀᴋᴎᴍ ᴏϬᴩᴀᴈᴏᴍ, investigating the activity of the mind, Hume assumed that it is based only on sensory experience. It turned out that if this activity has no other grounds, then all its results are problematic, unreliable both in cognitive and practical terms. Nature must have more effective means to ensure the life of their creatures. Thus, the thinker lays the foundation for the philosophy of irrationalism, which claims that it is not the mind, but the “stream of life”, healthy instincts, the “voice of blood”, which are the basis of human behavior. Hume turned out to be the creator of the original skeptical philosophy, the basis of which is agnosticism and phenomenalism.

1. The epistemological doctrine of Immanuel Kant.

2. Objective idealism of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel.

3. Anthropological materialism Ludwig Feuerbach.

Subjective idealism George Berkeley and David Hume. - concept and types. Classification and features of the category "Subjective idealism of George Berkeley and David Hume." 2017, 2018.

Berkeley idealism philosophy

Ideas Locke received a peculiar interpretation in the philosophy of his compatriot George Berkeley (1684-1753). It proceeds from the fact that sensations are the basis of knowledge, ideas are sensations or the results of the action of the mind on sensations. There is no fundamental difference between primary and secondary qualities. All qualities (ideas) are our sensations that do not have external cause and exist only in the knowing mind. Things are combinations of sensations in the mind. We know, therefore, only the sensations that experience gives. Hence the characteristic conclusion: to exist means to be perceived. Berkeley overcomes the ambiguity of philosophy Locke on the basis of subjective-idealistic sensationalism. Berkeley more radical Locke in the criticism of abstract ideas, especially the ideas of material substance. The concept of matter, in his opinion, means nothing and is harmful, since it was invented to justify godlessness. But myself Berkeley inconsistent, because it does not deny spiritual substance. The spirit, mind, "I" of a person is a prerequisite for knowledge, since ideas do not exist outside the spirit. Berkeley substantiates the clarity of ideas by referring to God as the cause of the connectedness of perceptions. Our sensations can be considered as signs of God. In essence, subjective idealism Berkeley becomes objective.

After Berkeley with the doctrine that the goal of science is to describe the perceived as the only reality, was David Hume(1711-1776). He explores the nature of man in connection with the analysis of the nature of knowledge. Hume emphasizes the primacy of the impressions of sensory experience in relation to the ideas generated on their basis. Ideas are thus not generated by immediate experience, but neither are they based on any rational necessity. The combination of ideas is based only on psychological association. Respectively Hume casts doubt on all general abstract concepts, in particular the ideas of both material and spiritual substances. Reasonable "I" for him is just a combination of impressions and ideas. Among the most important relations that play a key role in cognition, he singles out the relations of causality. According to Hume, the connection of cause and effect is not necessary, it is impossible to base conclusions on it, since when making a conclusion from cause to effect, we reason “out of habit”.

Hume denies the rational basis of knowledge. Certainly we can know, he says, only the immediate impressions of sensory experience. Thus, in the theory of knowledge Hume- agnostic. The denial of the rational basis of knowledge leads to irrationalism in the understanding of man: morality also does not have reliable rational grounds, passions dominate a person, a sense of fear is the basis for the emergence of religion. Ideas Yuma played a big role in further development Western European philosophy.

(duration - 20 minutes)

Before we turn to the consideration of the philosophy of the 18th century, it is necessary to dwell on the views of the representatives of subjective idealism, which include the English philosophers George Berkeley and David Hume.

George Berkeley (1685-1753) -- English philosopher; bishop in Cloyne (Ireland). In his main work - "Treatise on the Principles of Human Knowledge" (1710) , - argued that the external world does not exist independently of perceptions and thinking: the being of things consists in their perceptibility.

The theoretical basis of Berkeley's idealism is his the doctrine of abstraction. Berkeley considers the Lockeian theory of abstraction to be erroneous, according to which general ideas that arise through abstraction from the random properties of things have an independent existence in the human mind. He believes that it is impossible to imagine a person in general, a triangle in general, etc. In reality, any general idea, for example, the idea of ​​"fruit in general" is nothing but a representation of some particular fruit, which, however, interests the mind is not in itself, but in its representative function, as a representative of a whole class of objects. Other than a change in point of view, there is no other difference between a single and a general idea. The representative theory of abstraction is used by Berkeley to criticize a number of the most important concepts of traditional metaphysics. He is convinced that a misunderstanding of the nature of general ideas can lead to the creation of fictitious concepts, such as the concept of matter, as well as attempts to separate inseparable, for example, perception and existence.

One of the most important applications of the representational theory of abstraction is the doctrine of the inseparability of existence and perception. Berkeley expresses it with the short formula "esse is percipi", that is, "To be is to be perceived." The truth of this formula, according to Berkeley, is almost self-evident. Indeed, when we represent any sensible object, we simultaneously represent ourselves as representing this object. The subject cannot be thought of from the object. This means that objects have only a correlative existence, they depend on the perceiving spirit.

The principle “to be is to be perceived” in a narrow sense is significant only for sensible objects, which, however, do not exhaust all that exists. These objects themselves exist in spirits, to which another proposition applies: to be is to perceive. Spirits are simple substances and can know about their unity and substantiality with the help of "reflection", a special internal contemplation, which, however, does not provide us with "ideas", but allows us to form "concepts" about the properties of the spirit. Berkeley refuses to call these concepts "ideas", since the latter, in his opinion, do not contain any signs of activity, while spirits are not only perceiving, but also active beings. For in addition to perceptions or ideas, spirits are also endowed with will.

In general, the picture of the world, according to Berkeleian philosophy, can be represented as follows: only God exists absolutely, spirit exists relative to God, sensations relative to spirit, and material objects relative to sensations, and the existence of the latter is constantly questioned by them. Summarizing the above, we can say that Berkeley's doctrine of being is idealistic monism, which posits the unity of the world in its spirituality.

David Hume (1711-76) - Scottish philosopher, historian, economist. IN "Treatise on Human Nature" (1739-40) developed the doctrine of sensory experience (the source of knowledge) as a stream of "impressions", the causes of which are incomprehensible. Thus, Hume gravitated towards agnosticism - the doctrine of the unknowability of the world. When asked whether the external world exists, Hume answered evasively: "I don't know." They tell the following. When Hume, while in France, was present at a high-society reception, one lady turned to him with the question: “Mr. Hume, do you, treating your wife, also doubt her real existence?” To this, Hume remarked that in everyday practice he did not doubt the objective existence of things.

In the spirit of skepticism, Hume considered the problem of the relationship between being and spirit unsolvable. He also denied the objective nature of causality and the concept of substance. In ethics, he developed the concept of utilitarianism, in political economy he shared labor theory A. Smith's cost. Hume's doctrine is one of the sources of I. Kant's philosophy, positivism and neo-positivism.

The main place in Hume's philosophy is occupied by the theory of knowledge, which he develops in the spirit of sensationalism. Hume considers the source of knowledge to be experience, which consists of "perceptions" (perceptions), which Hume divides into "impressions" and "ideas". Impressions are distinguished by brightness and liveliness, they are the initial elements of sensory experience; Hume divides them into impressions of sensation and impressions of reflection. Ideas are copies of impressions, inferior to them in degree of brightness and liveliness. Ideas are divided into simple ones, arising from concrete impressions and corresponding to them, and complex ones (modes, substances and relations). Hume sees the psychological mechanism for the connection of perceptions in the principle of association (essentially unknowable), due to which complex ideas are formed from simple ones. Hume analyzes in detail three types of association of ideas: by resemblance, by contiguity in space and time, and, finally, the most common type - by causality.

Hume proposed to abandon the idea of ​​substance, considering it a fiction of the imagination. Having accepted George Berkeley's argument against material substance, Hume went further, criticizing also the concept of spiritual substance. The same fiction for Hume is the identity of the person created by the imagination, understood by him as "a bundle or bundle ... of various perceptions."

In the center theoretical philosophy Yuma - analysis of the problem of causality, i.e., a necessary connection between two events, which Hume considers unprovable: causal and logical connections do not coincide, the effect is not contained in the cause, is not like it, and cannot be deduced from it. Experience cannot be the basis of causality, since we do not observe the connection between cause and effect, but we only have the impression of the joint appearance of two events. We observe only that in time the effect is behind the cause, but this is a purely psychological fact, from which it is impossible to draw a conclusion: after this, it means therefore. The expectation that the future sequence of events will be similar to the past (for example, the sun will rise tomorrow) is based solely on faith, the source of which is habit. The habitual combination of impressions and ideas, accompanied by a special sense of obligation, creates, according to Hume, the idea of ​​the necessary connection between cause and effect. Thus, "necessity is something that exists in the mind and not in objects...". Hume's analysis of the problem of causality influenced the emergence of Kant's "critical philosophy", which we will discuss in detail in the next lecture.

Emphasizing the most important role of sensibility in morality, Hume stood on the position of ethical anti-intellectualism; he is also characterized by the rejection of the religious justification of morality. He emphasized that many moral philosophers do not explain the transition in reasoning from what is to what should be. In general, according to Hume, ethics deals with the motives of actions, which are ultimately determined by the psychological characteristics of people. In his teaching, utilitarianism is combined with altruism.

IN "Natural History of Religion" Hume showed the rootedness of religious ideas in the features of "human nature". He believed that monotheism was not the early religion of mankind. Worries about worldly affairs, hopes and fears, and by no means a simple and disinterested contemplation of nature, were, according to Hume, the source of religious ideas. He was also positive about the well-known hypothesis that the prototype of the gods of ancient religions were real people, which, thanks to their special merits, became the object of admiration of the people. In the famous chapter "On Miracles," included in the "Study on Human Knowledge," he argued that the descriptions of all kinds of miracles contradict the evidence of the senses and common sense. Hume's critical argument was intended to show not the impossibility of miracles as such, but the impossibility of a reasonable belief in miracles, which are violations of the laws of nature. He, like the deists, called his position "natural religion", which is based on the assumption of an unknowable higher cause.

CONCLUSIONS on question 2:

1. One of the directions in which English empiricism began to develop in the 18th century was the subjective idealism of Berkeley and Hume.

2. Berkeleianism is based on the idea: "to exist means to be perceived." For Berkeley, the whole world is a complex of my sensations, but whether there is some kind of reality behind the sensations, we, in his opinion, cannot know.

3. Continuing the tradition of Berkeley, Hume opposes the idea of ​​substance and the concept of causality. In his opinion, in the world itself there are no causes and effects, the idea of ​​causality appears in us as a result of the habit of observing alternating events.

4. Hume is also known as a critic of religion, he opposes both the concept of God and miracles.