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...
| Notification [x] |

| Author | Feedback | Action |
|
09/03/2010 After his release Charlie continued to live a life of crime in the California area, until he was arrested and charged with murder in 1970. No man has the obligation to put his life on the line unless to do so would cause the downfall of the sovereign. Hobbes states that "when the defence of the commonwealth, requireth at once the help of all that are able to bear arms, every one is obliged; because otherwise the institution of the commonwealth, which they have not the purpose, or courage to preserve, was in vain" (270). The only reason to set up a commonwealth is to exit of the State of Nature or State of War and enter the State of Man or State of Law. Since, however, there is no authority or power to enforce a covenant between commonwealths, all commonwealths are in a State of War with each other, and it is the obligation of every man in a commonwealth to defend against the enemy in time of need. If the citizens in a commonwealth refuse to defend the commonwealth, the covenant between the citizens is void and the commonwealth reverts back to the State of Nature in which every man is at war with every man. Logically, the rational man would choose to defend the commonwealth since not to do so would be to put their self preservation at risk. The first Law of Nature states "That every man, ought to endeavor Peace, as far as he has hope in obtaining it; and when he cannot obtain it, that he may seek, and use, all helps, and advantages of Warre" (190). Man in seeking peace makes a covenant with his fellow man to set up a sovereign. There can be no covenants between sovereigns, because there is no power to enforce a covenant. Therefore all sovereigns are in a state of war with each other. If a citizen wishes peace he must defend the commonwealth "otherwise the institution of the commonwealth, which they have not the purpose to preserve was in vain" (270), and we are all in the State of War. |
||
|
06/03/2010 learn many things from experience, and infer, that the same events will always follow the same causes. By this principle they become acquainted with the more obvious properties of external objects, and gradually, from their birth, treasure up a knowledge of the nature of fire, water, earth, stones, heights, depths, &c., and of the effects which result from their operation. (Hume, David S. "Concerning Human Understanding" Section IX, 83.) Custom then, is the great guide of human life. It is that principle alone which renders our experience useful to us, and makes us expect, for the future, a similar train of events with those which have appeared in the past. (Hume, David S. "Concerning Human Understanding" Section V, Part I, 36) |
||
|
09/03/2010 Pausanias discusses two kind of love. Pausanias says Phaedrus—who spoke just before Pausanias—should have differentiated between the heavenly love and the earthly love. He claims there are two loves just like there are two Aphrodites. The first love has an honorable purpose, and enjoys the intelligence of man's nature. The first love is ever faithful and shows no sign of desire for other's and lust. The second is the rougher kind of love, which is the love of the physical body, not the soul. The second kind of love is just as likely to be the love of women and boys as well as man. The integrated unity can not be the starting point, because there can be no starting point in the empirical method except reflection itself and reflection is contingent upon the value and meaning each individual gives it in the current historical time. Dewey, in essence, is using integrated unity as a selective emphasis "as if it were primary, as if it were the original 'given'" (Dewey, P. 9). However, it can only be the primary if it is the first time anyone has had that experience, and that is not likely. |