Topic, freedom and will, Hume,A Treatise of Human Nature, Book II, Part III, §§1-2 Text available at http://www.class.uidaho.edu/mickelsen/ToC/hume%20treatise%20ToC.htm Journals due on March 24
According to Hume, the direct passions or impressions that come out of good or evil, pain or pleasure are; desire and aversion, grief and joy, hope and fear. We discussed in class that passion is an internal sense, and if I am right in saying that desire and aversion etc. are also internal senses, than I am pleased to say I actually understand the first line of this section. Let me see what I can make out from here. I get what Hume means by Will, and that liberty and necessity is a natural part of the Will. We see objects as they are expected to exist, and we see connections between them only as we expect them to be, not as they really are. This relates to the discussion we had in class on Thursday where Professor Tang pointed out that even though it appears that he is pushing the student, it may be that the student had decided to move her own body. I think some things are more driven by fate than others, for example I believe it is more likely that for the rest of time people will grow as they age and plants will give fruit, than it is likely that for all time humans will be drawn towards a society. It's interesting that Hume chose to elude his argument by taking it on from the opposite viewpoint. The philosophers I have been introduced to throughout this course all appear very brilliant. He makes a good argument against himself, saying that how can we see regularity and necessity in men when they so often act out of character. I actually think that this is just another aspect of the regularity in humans. We use our perception rather than a concluded understanding of the relation between things, and this is because once we see a connection, we relate it to other times we have seen the same connection and we use that relativity as basis of our understanding. Liberty and chance are opposites of necessity, in the same sense that chance is the opposite of need. The last point in section II about criminal acts and proof is very unclear.
In the readings, Hume first says that good& evil, pain & pleasure arise from desire& aversion, grief & joy, and hope & fear. The effects of pain and pleasure is the will. We need liberty and necessity for will to occur naturally. There are two essntial aspects of necessity which is the union and the inference of the mind. There are connections between the actions of the mind and necessity. We use what we know to understand the relationships between things and how they relate to each other. Necessity is regular and certain, but human conduct is irregular and uncertain. Cause and effect are two distinct things from one another. The cause of something, has the effect of what happens after. In section 2, Hume speaks about criminal and the proofs.
In, A Treatise of Human Nature, Book II, Part III, Hume talks about the connection and uniformity of humans. Hume believes that our actions have a constant union with our motives, tempers, and circumstances. Hume talks a lot about connection and uniformity. One example he gives is how men cannot live without society, and cannot be associated without government. There are many different ranks of people, he tells us that, "this produces industry, traffic, manufactures, law-suits, war, leagues, alliances, voyages, travels, cities, fleets, ports, and all those other actions and objects, which cause such a diversity, and at the same time maintain such an uniformity in human life." Hume also tells us that "Necessity is regular and certain. Human conduct is irregular and uncertain." I agree with this statement the way people think is always different, one moment you might agree with something and the next you don't. Liberty is based on regularity because everyone thinks differently, there really isn't a right or wrong since its our opinion. Certain things are natural and is basically a fact. Hume says "Our way of thinking in this particular is, therefore, absolutely inconsistent." In section II he talks about liberty and will. He tells us that our liberty is influenced by particular views and motives. "The idea of necessity seeming to imply something of force, and violence, and constraint, of which we are not sensible." Liberty is also influenced by religion. From what I understand, when he talks about "criminals" according to what he told us, criminals are not really criminals since "liberty" is influenced and unnatural. Liberty and morals are not facts, thus we cannot say that someone is a criminal for breaking a man made "law".
In book 3 part 2 Hume talks alot about impression.He breaks up impression into two parts.The first one was the orginal impression or sensational impression which comes from objects to the external organs and then there was the secondary impression or reflective impression which has to do more with senses and emotions such as pain and pleasures.A good example that Hume gave of these impressions is when he said "Bodily pains and pleasures are the source of many passions,both when felt and considered by the mind:but arise originally in the soul ,or in the body,without any preceding thought or perception".Here it shows that the first impression is more involutary.Its something thats not thought about but more so natural.With reflective impression I think thats more volutary.You feel good or bad because of something.
This was an interesting read. Hume says that direct passions are desire, aversion, grief, joy, hope, and fear. He adds that the will, “the internal impression we feel and are conscious of, when we knowingly give rise to any new motion of our body,” is not understood by passions. However, passions are needed to explain the will. Hume also tries to understand if the will is driven by liberty or is of necessity. He also adds that there is a connection, a union as he calls it, between motives and tempers. Liberty, as Hume sees it, is “influenc'd by particular views and motives.” Here Hume is saying that liberty is governed by necessity.
Hume on book II discussed passions and reason and he separated them in to original impressions and secondary impressions. He explained original impression as senses and secondary impressions as ideas. The passions, according to Hume are found in the secondary impressions and have direct and indirect passion. The direct passions he explained such as desire, aversion, grief, joy, hope, and fear. And indirect passions, such as pride, humility, love, and hatred, Human also said our moral decision effect our action and morality is not part of the reason. I think Passions are completely different from reason and we might use reason for our passion. Passion is what we desire and reason is part of internal will. The all human actions are the products of causal necessity and that they are free, I don’t agree with the idea because I think he our action part of reason and purpose and we do things different for different reasons.
In A Treatise of Human Nature Book II Part 3, Hume begins to discuss the topic on impressions and later liberty. Hume stated that passions/impressions derive from good/evil or pain/pleasure. According to Hume passion is what motivates human begins. While reading this book I was confused when Hume said that our actions are not a result of passion which are either reasonable or unreasonable. Hume said that because of passion has nothing to do with reasoning. One of the biggest effects of pain and pleasure according to Hume is will. In order for will to occur one needs both liberty and necessity. Liberty is freedom while necessity is the need for something. Union and interference of he mind are two essential aspects of necessity. Hume believes that all actions are the products of necessity and liberty. I do not agree with this. I do not think that all actions are for necessity. Many people do things without any reason. For example many people commit crimes but when asked for a reason as to why they did something they fail to answer. Everyone is different and we all have different reasons for our actions. On the other hand some actions are forced and therefore there is no liberty involved. Young kids are forced by their parents to do certain things and they do not have the liberty to choose between following their parents or going against their demands. Hume gives us three reasons for the prevalence of the doctrine of liberty. The 1st reason is that our actions are motivated by different views, 2nd we argue if liberty is even real or is it an illusion and 3rd it is related to religion. Although Hume has very strong opions which are really great I do not fully agree with him.
In Hume i got the idea that hume believes the premise that all of our knowledge is based on our experiences, and using this method to examine several philosophical concepts. First, he demonstrates that all of our complex ideas are formed out of simpler ideas, which were themselves formed on the basis of impressions we received through our senses. Therefore, ideas are not fundamentally different from experiences. Second, Hume defines “matters of fact” as matters that must be experienced, not reasoned out or arrived at instinctually. Based on these two claims, Hume attacks metaphysical systems used to prove the existence of God, the soul, divine creation, and other such ideas. Since we have no experience of any of these things and cannot receive a direct impression of them, we have no real reason to believe that they are true. which hume does have a good cocept on this one, i believe can be true in some cases.
Hume book II, the reading was very entertaining and very understandable insect. I, he explain the arrival of idea of cause and effect, when observing and connecting a movement of an object, it isn’t either by our senses or reason that our bodies constructs, as a principle, what really happen, when a person touch a chair with action of a push that this chair moves. Therefore “determination of the mind to pass from one objects to its usual attendant, and infer the existence of one from that of the other”. And I learn from this reading that our actions have a union, or bond with our motives, tempers, and circumstances before we draw inferences from it. Hume discussed the different station of life how their influences our external and internal, and arise necessarily, because of the necessary and uniform principles of human nature. It our natural instinct therefore “men cannot live without society and cannot be associated without government.” Government is important in the life of men. And cause and effect arise from objects constantly united, and Hume discover that a conclusion is an understand yes it is true as well a perception of things, but their “nature and their operation on the understanding never change”. Lastly, in section II the three reasons for the prevalence of the doctrine of liberty was an interesting reading. I will end this journal with saying that I learn that reasoning is equally solid, when applied to divide laws, and produce obedience. As with doctrine of liberty the law says if never proofs of a crime were, consequently never were criminal, to who ever charge of a crime.
In A Treatise of Human Nature Book II Part III, Hume talks about the concept of liberty and necessity. In the second paragraph the concept of will is being discussed. According to the text, 'will' means an internal feeling and conscious one perceive according to the knowledge in one's body and mind. In order to acknowledge the concept of 'will' one should know that it will always encounter the necessary. A few paragraphs in section I really go in depth about the parts of the body and they compare it as a man's quality. Men need other sources in order to survive. For example, the need of society and government. The government establish property and rank men. According to the text necessity is regular and certain. On the other hand, human conduct is irregular and uncertain. In the text it was mentioned that moral is a conclusion concerning the actions of men. For example, the consideration of their motives, temper, and situation. Even thought cause and effect are use in the same circumstances they are two different concepts. There was an interesting statement made in section I in which i totally agree with. It was said that we may change the names of things but we can never change its origin. There were three different reason of why the doctrine of liberty is applied. By the end of the two sections in my own words it was said that even though a man commits a crime they are still pure as when they were born. I totally disagree with this statement because once someone commits a crime they have led themselves into a different perspective of life. For example, someone cannot commit a crime and still feel decent of themselves instead i believe they will feel a guilt of shame because they have committed an attempt of horror.
In, A Treatise of Human Nature, Book II, Part III, Hume talks about how direct passion come from; "which arise immediately from good or evil, from pain or pleasure. Of this kind are, desire and aversion, grief and joy, hope and fear." He said that their effect is great but the most effective one is will. That everyone has their own passion and desire that makes they do what they do and that comes from their will.He also explained how there are different trees, that produces different fruits and the trees relish from each other; and this distinguish through their force and maturity.I agree with what Hume had to say about how men cannot live without society because it creates some type of balance for men. Without society and government there wouldn't be any laws, cities, travels, etc and i agree society and government makes diversity. Hume also said that "We may change the names of things; but their nature and their operation on the understanding never change." I agree with this quote because no matter how much we change an objects name we cannot change its nature or its functions. In Section II, Hume talks about liberty and how religion affects liberty and about opposite needs, he also talked about how liberty is based on facts and not morality and you can justify a criminal for breaking a man made law. I wrote what i understood from the reading and that made more sense to me.
Hume, in the reading, debates whether our will is due to liberty or necessity. He states that often, we don't acknowledge that our perception of true will is actual acts of necessity. Hume makes a interesting point when he believes that when an object has uniform and conjunction with the others, we can see a relation leading to ideas of cause and effect. And we can only say that our will is done not out of necessity when we do it according to our temper and circumtances. Therefore leading to "Necessity is regular and certain. Human conduct is irregular and uncertain." I feel, after reading "A Treatise Of Human Nature Book II", that there's hardly any true free will. We are governed by society of what's acceptible and what's not. Doing something out of the ordinary and discerning yourself as a widely unique and different person, average people criticize you. They place negative comments on an individual and eventually but slowly, the individual restrains themself from doing what they truly want. Society can put a tow on a person's true identity. So to me, there's a rear case of free will.
This reading involved heavily around a person's actions based on their nature. More specifically, their will and freedom to act based on how they choose to. Many aspects were introduced, such as a person's passions that can be affected by many factors including desire and aversion, joy and grief, hope and fear.
The highlighted concept would be will, and along with will comes the factors of necessity and liberty that influences will.
What I don't understand is how necessity is a simple subfactor of what influences will, and not a constant one. Because all of our actions will have with it a sense of necessity no matter what it is, but actions can be without liberty. From leisurely actions, to that actions out of need, necessity will always be existant. When you're relaxing, he necessity to relax is there, although to a purely singular extent. When you're working, the necessity to make money is there. However, libery, if I'm not mistaken, involves how one see things, and is tied to wether or not something is wrong or not. Doing a crime for example, its defined as wrong, and yet, some still do it. Would that action still have liberty? I don't believe it would. This section concerning liberty is still blurry to me, however, I standby my prior statement that all actions have with them necessity, and therefore, I don't agree its placement as a subcategory that influences will, for it is, i believe, a constant one.
Hume first talks about how good and evil, pain and pleasure come from desire & aversion, grief and joy and hope and fear. He said one of biggest effects of pain and pleasure is will. Will comes from the need of both liberty and necessity. Liberty is the freedom and necessity is the need for something. In part 2 of book 3 Hume discusses impression. He breaks impression into two components original impression and sensational impression. In book 2 I was kind of getting confused with the discussion of the result of passion.
According to Hume there are two types of impressions: original impressions and secondary impressions. Original impressions are comprised of internal senses, like physical pleasure and pain. They are original because they come from outside of us and are new. Secondary impressions are comprised of impressions that precede by either original impression or ideas, which come from original impressions. This is where passion stems from. Hume goes on to break passions into two separate types. First, direct passions which are composed of desire, aversion, grief, joy, hope and fear. Secondly are the indirect passions which are made up of pride, humility, love and hatred. Hume says that moral decisions affect actions, while decisions of reason do not, therefore, morality is not based on reason. This is because actions are the result of passions and passions according has nothing to do with reason since it stems from secondary impressions. In regards to proof and criminal acts I am very lost!
the reading aboput hume is a bit interesting, hume describes impressions and ideas. impressions according to humes is the immediate data of experience, ideas in the other hand are copies or faint images. when we think our thoughts are they part of are ideas or are they impressions. i did get a bit confused when he speaks of this cause it makes me think, are my ideas just thoughts of what has happened or are they my own.Hume also speaks of the will,i felt a bit lost when i t came to this part, i didn't understand his idea that the will was combined with different aspects in order to be present.
In Hume’s argument about liberty and necessity, it was difficult for me to understand unlike his argument in Book III, part I. Hume argues that cause and effect occur as a result of liberty and necessity. He said that there are two things we have to consider as essential to necessity which are the constant and the inference of the mind and whenever we find these we must acknowledge a necessity. I believe that in life there are some things that most people engage in as a result of necessity not because they want it. Hume also argues that necessity is regular and certain and human conduct is irregular and uncertain which I seem to have agreed with him. The irregularity and uncertainty of human conduct can not be overemphasized. Most times people’s conducts are affected by internal and external forces that are beyond their control. Some times people react to things due to other people’s actions and behaviors.
Hume says that will is " the internal impression we feel and are concious of, when we knowingly give rise to any new motion of our body, or new perception of our mind" he also sees that will is influence by liberty and necessity.
In further reading huma’s ideas towards human being is that, our mind is where our passion and actions (reason) is generated. He explains in the teachings, which make me question myself that “the capacity of the mind is limited and can never attain a full and adequate conception of infinity:” Perhaps I believe not all times we are in need of anything, but just because human being have a bad habit or inferior to ourselves, things of that nature is bound to take place. He believed that human beings are passionate and reasonable. That human being should know the different between good and evil. But he made a statement that brings an argument that our actions are not a result of passion which is either reasonable or unreasonable. I think its goes both ways depending on the needs or want of the action. Love can go a long way from my point of view, people kill for love which is passion and unreasonable, while a bank robber reason and no passion. His idea for rubbing a bank has being imagined and then put to use. This story of huma brings me back to Plato, talking about neither justice, that human being can only judge itself nor judge the next man. We need to judge ourselves before the next person, depending on the curse of action. Human in general are complex to one another based on their color, race, culture, wealth etc. I believe huma and his teaching, really explains some things clearly and some hard to comprehend.
According to Hume, the direct passions or impressions that come out of good or evil, pain or pleasure are; desire and aversion, grief and joy, hope and fear. We discussed in class that passion is an internal sense, and if I am right in saying that desire and aversion etc. are also internal senses, than I am pleased to say I actually understand the first line of this section. Let me see what I can make out from here. I get what Hume means by Will, and that liberty and necessity is a natural part of the Will. We see objects as they are expected to exist, and we see connections between them only as we expect them to be, not as they really are. This relates to the discussion we had in class on Thursday where Professor Tang pointed out that even though it appears that he is pushing the student, it may be that the student had decided to move her own body. I think some things are more driven by fate than others, for example I believe it is more likely that for the rest of time people will grow as they age and plants will give fruit, than it is likely that for all time humans will be drawn towards a society. It's interesting that Hume chose to elude his argument by taking it on from the opposite viewpoint. The philosophers I have been introduced to throughout this course all appear very brilliant. He makes a good argument against himself, saying that how can we see regularity and necessity in men when they so often act out of character. I actually think that this is just another aspect of the regularity in humans. We use our perception rather than a concluded understanding of the relation between things, and this is because once we see a connection, we relate it to other times we have seen the same connection and we use that relativity as basis of our understanding. Liberty and chance are opposites of necessity, in the same sense that chance is the opposite of need. The last point in section II about criminal acts and proof is very unclear.
ReplyDeleteIn the readings, Hume first says that good& evil, pain & pleasure arise from desire& aversion, grief & joy, and hope & fear. The effects of pain and pleasure is the will. We need liberty and necessity for will to occur naturally. There are two essntial aspects of necessity which is the union and the inference of the mind. There are connections between the actions of the mind and necessity. We use what we know to understand the relationships between things and how they relate to each other. Necessity is regular and certain, but human conduct is irregular and uncertain. Cause and effect are two distinct things from one another. The cause of something, has the effect of what happens after. In section 2, Hume speaks about criminal and the proofs.
ReplyDeleteIn, A Treatise of Human Nature, Book II, Part III, Hume talks about the connection and uniformity of humans. Hume believes that our actions have a constant union with our motives, tempers, and circumstances. Hume talks a lot about connection and uniformity. One example he gives is how men cannot live without society, and cannot be associated without government. There are many different ranks of people, he tells us that, "this produces industry, traffic, manufactures, law-suits, war, leagues, alliances, voyages, travels, cities, fleets, ports, and all those other actions and objects, which cause such a diversity, and at the same time maintain such an uniformity in human life." Hume also tells us that "Necessity is regular and certain. Human conduct is irregular and uncertain." I agree with this statement the way people think is always different, one moment you might agree with something and the next you don't. Liberty is based on regularity because everyone thinks differently, there really isn't a right or wrong since its our opinion. Certain things are natural and is basically a fact. Hume says "Our way of thinking in this particular is, therefore, absolutely inconsistent." In section II he talks about liberty and will. He tells us that our liberty is influenced by particular views and motives. "The idea of necessity seeming to imply something of force, and violence, and constraint, of which we are not sensible." Liberty is also influenced by religion. From what I understand, when he talks about "criminals" according to what he told us, criminals are not really criminals since "liberty" is influenced and unnatural. Liberty and morals are not facts, thus we cannot say that someone is a criminal for breaking a man made "law".
ReplyDeleteIn book 3 part 2 Hume talks alot about impression.He breaks up impression into two parts.The first one was the orginal impression or sensational impression which comes from objects to the external organs and then there was the secondary impression or reflective impression which has to do more with senses and emotions such as pain and pleasures.A good example that Hume gave of these impressions is when he said "Bodily pains and pleasures are the source of many passions,both when felt and considered by the mind:but arise originally in the soul ,or in the body,without any preceding thought or perception".Here it shows that the first impression is more involutary.Its something thats not thought about but more so natural.With reflective impression I think thats more volutary.You feel good or bad because of something.
ReplyDeleteThis was an interesting read. Hume says that direct passions are desire, aversion, grief, joy, hope, and fear. He adds that the will, “the internal impression we feel and are conscious of, when we knowingly give rise to any new motion of our body,” is not understood by passions. However, passions are needed to explain the will. Hume also tries to understand if the will is driven by liberty or is of necessity. He also adds that there is a connection, a union as he calls it, between motives and tempers. Liberty, as Hume sees it, is “influenc'd by particular views and motives.” Here Hume is saying that liberty is governed by necessity.
ReplyDeleteHume on book II discussed passions and reason and he separated them in to original impressions and secondary impressions. He explained original impression as senses and secondary impressions as ideas. The passions, according to Hume are found in the secondary impressions and have direct and indirect passion. The direct passions he explained such as desire, aversion, grief, joy, hope, and fear. And indirect passions, such as pride, humility, love, and hatred, Human also said our moral decision effect our action and morality is not part of the reason. I think Passions are completely different from reason and we might use reason for our passion. Passion is what we desire and reason is part of internal will. The all human actions are the products of causal necessity and that they are free, I don’t agree with the idea because I think he our action part of reason and purpose and we do things different for different reasons.
ReplyDeleteIn A Treatise of Human Nature Book II Part 3, Hume begins to discuss the topic on impressions and later liberty. Hume stated that passions/impressions derive from good/evil or pain/pleasure. According to Hume passion is what motivates human begins. While reading this book I was confused when Hume said that our actions are not a result of passion which are either reasonable or unreasonable. Hume said that because of passion has nothing to do with reasoning. One of the biggest effects of pain and pleasure according to Hume is will. In order for will to occur one needs both liberty and necessity. Liberty is freedom while necessity is the need for something. Union and interference of he mind are two essential aspects of necessity. Hume believes that all actions are the products of necessity and liberty. I do not agree with this. I do not think that all actions are for necessity. Many people do things without any reason. For example many people commit crimes but when asked for a reason as to why they did something they fail to answer. Everyone is different and we all have different reasons for our actions. On the other hand some actions are forced and therefore there is no liberty involved. Young kids are forced by their parents to do certain things and they do not have the liberty to choose between following their parents or going against their demands. Hume gives us three reasons for the prevalence of the doctrine of liberty. The 1st reason is that our actions are motivated by different views, 2nd we argue if liberty is even real or is it an illusion and 3rd it is related to religion. Although Hume has very strong opions which are really great I do not fully agree with him.
ReplyDeleteIn Hume i got the idea that hume believes the premise that all of our knowledge is based on our experiences, and using this method to examine several philosophical concepts. First, he demonstrates that all of our complex ideas are formed out of simpler ideas, which were themselves formed on the basis of impressions we received through our senses. Therefore, ideas are not fundamentally different from experiences. Second, Hume defines “matters of fact” as matters that must be experienced, not reasoned out or arrived at instinctually. Based on these two claims, Hume attacks metaphysical systems used to prove the existence of God, the soul, divine creation, and other such ideas. Since we have no experience of any of these things and cannot receive a direct impression of them, we have no real reason to believe that they are true. which hume does have a good cocept on this one, i believe can be true in some cases.
ReplyDeleteHume book II, the reading was very entertaining and very understandable insect. I, he explain the arrival of idea of cause and effect, when observing and connecting a movement of an object, it isn’t either by our senses or reason that our bodies constructs, as a principle, what really happen, when a person touch a chair with action of a push that this chair moves. Therefore “determination of the mind to pass from one objects to its usual attendant, and infer the existence of one from that of the other”. And I learn from this reading that our actions have a union, or bond with our motives, tempers, and circumstances before we draw inferences from it.
ReplyDeleteHume discussed the different station of life how their influences our external and internal, and arise necessarily, because of the necessary and uniform principles of human nature. It our natural instinct therefore “men cannot live without society and cannot be associated without government.” Government is important in the life of men. And cause and effect arise from objects constantly united, and Hume discover that a conclusion is an understand yes it is true as well a perception of things, but their “nature and their operation on the understanding never change”.
Lastly, in section II the three reasons for the prevalence of the doctrine of liberty was an interesting reading. I will end this journal with saying that I learn that reasoning is equally solid, when applied to divide laws, and produce obedience. As with doctrine of liberty the law says if never proofs of a crime were, consequently never were criminal, to who ever charge of a crime.
In A Treatise of Human Nature Book II Part III, Hume talks about the concept of liberty and necessity. In the second paragraph the concept of will is being discussed. According to the text, 'will' means an internal feeling and conscious one perceive according to the knowledge in one's body and mind. In order to acknowledge the concept of 'will' one should know that it will always encounter the necessary. A few paragraphs in section I really go in depth about the parts of the body and they compare it as a man's quality. Men need other sources in order to survive. For example, the need of society and government. The government establish property and rank men. According to the text necessity is regular and certain. On the other hand, human conduct is irregular and uncertain. In the text it was mentioned that moral is a conclusion concerning the actions of men. For example, the consideration of their motives, temper, and situation. Even thought cause and effect are use in the same circumstances they are two different concepts. There was an interesting statement made in section I in which i totally agree with. It was said that we may change the names of things but we can never change its origin. There were three different reason of why the doctrine of liberty is applied. By the end of the two sections in my own words it was said that even though a man commits a crime they are still pure as when they were born. I totally disagree with this statement because once someone commits a crime they have led themselves into a different perspective of life. For example, someone cannot commit a crime and still feel decent of themselves instead i believe they will feel a guilt of shame because they have committed an attempt of horror.
ReplyDeleteIn, A Treatise of Human Nature, Book II, Part III, Hume talks about how direct passion come from; "which arise immediately from good or evil, from pain or pleasure. Of this kind are, desire and aversion, grief and joy, hope and fear." He said that their effect is great but the most effective one is will. That everyone has their own passion and desire that makes they do what they do and that comes from their will.He also explained how there are different trees, that produces different fruits and the trees relish from each other; and this distinguish through their force and maturity.I agree with what Hume had to say about how men cannot live without society because it creates some type of balance for men. Without society and government there wouldn't be any laws, cities, travels, etc and i agree society and government makes diversity. Hume also said that "We may change the names of things; but their nature and their operation on the understanding never change." I agree with this quote because no matter how much we change an objects name we cannot change its nature or its functions. In Section II, Hume talks about liberty and how religion affects liberty and about opposite needs, he also talked about how liberty is based on facts and not morality and you can justify a criminal for breaking a man made law. I wrote what i understood from the reading and that made more sense to me.
ReplyDeleteHume, in the reading, debates whether our will is due to liberty or necessity. He states that often, we don't acknowledge that our perception of true will is actual acts of necessity. Hume makes a interesting point when he believes that when an object has uniform and conjunction with the others, we can see a relation leading to ideas of cause and effect. And we can only say that our will is done not out of necessity when we do it according to our temper and circumtances. Therefore leading to "Necessity is regular and certain. Human conduct is irregular and uncertain." I feel, after reading "A Treatise Of Human Nature Book II", that there's hardly any true free will. We are governed by society of what's acceptible and what's not. Doing something out of the ordinary and discerning yourself as a widely unique and different person, average people criticize you. They place negative comments on an individual and eventually but slowly, the individual restrains themself from doing what they truly want. Society can put a tow on a person's true identity. So to me, there's a rear case of free will.
ReplyDeleteThis reading involved heavily around a person's actions based on their nature. More specifically, their will and freedom to act based on how they choose to. Many aspects were introduced, such as a person's passions that can be affected by many factors including desire and aversion, joy and grief, hope and fear.
ReplyDeleteThe highlighted concept would be will, and along with will comes the factors of necessity and liberty that influences will.
What I don't understand is how necessity is a simple subfactor of what influences will, and not a constant one. Because all of our actions will have with it a sense of necessity no matter what it is, but actions can be without liberty. From leisurely actions, to that actions out of need, necessity will always be existant. When you're relaxing, he necessity to relax is there, although to a purely singular extent. When you're working, the necessity to make money is there. However, libery, if I'm not mistaken, involves how one see things, and is tied to wether or not something is wrong or not. Doing a crime for example, its defined as wrong, and yet, some still do it. Would that action still have liberty? I don't believe it would. This section concerning liberty is still blurry to me, however, I standby my prior statement that all actions have with them necessity, and therefore, I don't agree its placement as a subcategory that influences will, for it is, i believe, a constant one.
Hume first talks about how good and evil, pain and pleasure come from desire & aversion, grief and joy and hope and fear. He said one of biggest effects of pain and pleasure is will. Will comes from the need of both liberty and necessity. Liberty is the freedom and necessity is the need for something. In part 2 of book 3 Hume discusses impression. He breaks impression into two components original impression and sensational impression. In book 2 I was kind of getting confused with the discussion of the result of passion.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Hume there are two types of impressions: original impressions and secondary impressions. Original impressions are comprised of internal senses, like physical pleasure and pain. They are original because they come from outside of us and are new. Secondary impressions are comprised of impressions that precede by either original impression or ideas, which come from original impressions. This is where passion stems from. Hume goes on to break passions into two separate types. First, direct passions which are composed of desire, aversion, grief, joy, hope and fear. Secondly are the indirect passions which are made up of pride, humility, love and hatred. Hume says that moral decisions affect actions, while decisions of reason do not, therefore, morality is not based on reason. This is because actions are the result of passions and passions according has nothing to do with reason since it stems from secondary impressions. In regards to proof and criminal acts I am very lost!
ReplyDeletethe reading aboput hume is a bit interesting, hume describes impressions and ideas. impressions according to humes is the immediate data of experience, ideas in the other hand are copies or faint images. when we think our thoughts are they part of are ideas or are they impressions. i did get a bit confused when he speaks of this cause it makes me think, are my ideas just thoughts of what has happened or are they my own.Hume also speaks of the will,i felt a bit lost when i t came to this part, i didn't understand his idea that the will was combined with different aspects in order to be present.
ReplyDeleteIn Hume’s argument about liberty and necessity, it was difficult for me to understand unlike his argument in Book III, part I. Hume argues that cause and effect occur as a result of liberty and necessity. He said that there are two things we have to consider as essential to necessity which are the constant and the inference of the mind and whenever we find these we must acknowledge a necessity. I believe that in life there are some things that most people engage in as a result of necessity not because they want it. Hume also argues that necessity is regular and certain and human conduct is irregular and uncertain which I seem to have agreed with him. The irregularity and uncertainty of human conduct can not be overemphasized. Most times people’s conducts are affected by internal and external forces that are beyond their control. Some times people react to things due to other people’s actions and behaviors.
ReplyDeleteHume says that will is " the internal impression we feel and are concious of, when we knowingly give rise to any new motion of our body, or new perception of our mind" he also sees that will is influence by liberty and necessity.
ReplyDeleteIn further reading huma’s ideas towards human being is that, our mind is where our passion and actions (reason) is generated. He explains in the teachings, which make me question myself that “the capacity of the mind is limited and can never attain a full and adequate conception of infinity:” Perhaps I believe not all times we are in need of anything, but just because human being have a bad habit or inferior to ourselves, things of that nature is bound to take place. He believed that human beings are passionate and reasonable. That human being should know the different between good and evil. But he made a statement that brings an argument that our actions are not a result of passion which is either reasonable or unreasonable. I think its goes both ways depending on the needs or want of the action. Love can go a long way from my point of view, people kill for love which is passion and unreasonable, while a bank robber reason and no passion. His idea for rubbing a bank has being imagined and then put to use. This story of huma brings me back to Plato, talking about neither justice, that human being can only judge itself nor judge the next man. We need to judge ourselves before the next person, depending on the curse of action. Human in general are complex to one another based on their color, race, culture, wealth etc. I believe huma and his teaching, really explains some things clearly and some hard to comprehend.
ReplyDelete