Matters of fact, which are the second objects of human reason, are not ascertained in the same manner; nor is our evidence of their truth, however great, of a like nature with the foregoing. The contrary of every matter of fact is still possible; because it can never imply a contradiction, and is conceived by the mind with the same facility and distinctness, as if ever so conformable to reality. That the sun will not rise tomorrow is no less intelligible a proposition, and implies no more contradiction than the affirmation, that it will rise. We should in vain, therfore, attempt to demonstrate its falsehood. (Hume, David S. "Concerning Human Understanding" Section IV, Part I, 20)
Hume's obvious goal was to refute Descartes, and defend Berkely. He does an admirable job, considering any statement even remotely acknowledging Descartes' theory of thought as being the only thing we cannot disprove, would in turn disprove his own theories. However, Hume misses the boat, in his defense of his own beliefs. True knowledge is gained from the thought process and experience. It is the combination of these two factors that allows us to define truth. Descartes was half right, and Berkley was half right. Truth cannot be determined until the possible results have been rationalized, and the actual results of events have been measured.
|
|
|
Favorites
Del.icio.us
Digg
Furl
Magnolia
StumbleUpon
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
BlinkList