Hume’s Theory in Brief
Hume’s theory is a theory of based on how we can be able to make inductive references and knowledge. This theory revolves around skepticism which is the belief that people cannot have full knowledge on the nature because perception reveals things not as they are, but as we experience them. In more expanded form, knowledge can never be acquired in truth, and as such we should be in a position to question it
The domain of application of Hume’s theory is directly related to the philosophical understanding of human beings. This led to the development of mitigated skepticism that seeks to find a deeper understanding of human thinking. To Mitigated skepticism within this context refers to Hume’s attempt to rid off all skepticism in human origin and replace them with questions that people have the capacity to understand. Hume’s therefore advances that ideas are more important than belief and beliefs are direct products of ideas and assumptions.
Existence of Any Material Object
The two views presented by Hume within this theory on the existence of two material objects have led philosophers to deny that we can ever know of the existence of any material object. Moore (102) presents the two views by stating that
Hume’s theory tends to provide two cases: the case where we believe that something which we have not directly apprehended certainly did exist, or is existing, or will exist; and the case where we believe that something which we have not directly apprehended, probably did exist, or is existing, or will exist.”
The confusion brought about by the inability to ascertain the existence of a particular material object as advanced by Hume’s theory. No man can therefore know the existence of one material object without having the knowledge of a preceding object. Moore’s proof on the correctness of Hume’s theory is based on the advancement that “we believe that something which we have not directly apprehended probably exists or has existed or will exist” Moore (103). Moore (102) illustrates that if Hume’s rules are correct, one of the views is correct as well because there is no link between the truth and apprehension.
Objections of Hume’s Theory
Moore presents a reason for doubting the last part of Hume’s theory by raising the abjections on the inconclusiveness of an argument. According to Moore (112) “a really conclusive argument is one which enables us to know that its conclusion is true. One condition that must be satisfied within this premise is not clear as Moore argues. In addition to the above, we can never really know the existence of an object material through assumption. This is because we know the existence of a material object by assumption, conscious or unconscious than we would totally contradict the philosophies of Hume.
Another important fact is that every man’s knowledge on what exists is governed by what is beyond his apprehension. Hume’s arguments in regard to human knowledge therefore fall short making the final conclusion on the ability to have knowledge on the existence of a material object. David Hume therefore argues that there is no truth and the search for truth encompasses an important and continuous activity of humans. Human beings therefore have a duty to keep on seeking it by constantly supporting the works, ideas and thoughts of one another.
Work Cited
Moore, George. Some Main Problems of Philosophy. New York: Rutledge. 2004.