David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy Research Archives 13:245-269 (1987)
In this essay I try, first, to show that Lockean passages in Book I can be given a Berkeleian interpretation. I take two passages that have, in particular, been cited as allowing only a Lockean interpretation and show how they can be more coherently construed as Berkeleian in their intended meaning. In the process of this demonstration I show that only a Berkeleian interpretation is tenable for Book I. Second, I defend the Berkeleian interpretation against several charges; for instance, a charge of textual inconsistency. I do, however, acknowledge in the process that in the Enquiry and subsequently Hume abandons Berkeley for Locke. I then offer an explanation of why he did and lastly I try to show that though Hume is thereby committed to an inconsistency he provides a way for justifying his (and our) conversational commitment to that inconsistency
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Vadim V. Vasilyev (2013). Hume's Methodology and the Science of Human Nature. History of Philosophy Yearbook 2012:62-115.
Henry E. Allison (2008). Custom and Reason in Hume: A Kantian Reading of the First Book of the Treatise. Oxford University Press.
Stephen M. Campbell (2009). The Surprise Twist in Hume's Treatise. Hume Studies 35 (1&2):103-34.
Austen Clark (1996). Review of Robert Schwartz, Vision: Variations on Some Berkeleian Themes. [REVIEW] Philosophical Psychology 9 (1):147-51.
James Baillie (2000). Hume on Morality. Routledge.
James W. Cornman (1970). Theoretical Terms, Berkeleian Notions, and Minds. In Colin Murray Turbayne (ed.), A Treatise on the Principles of Human Knowledge / George Berkeley, with Critical Essays. Bobbs-Merrill.
Jeffrey K. McDonough (2002). Hume's Account of Memory. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 10 (1):71 – 87.
Henrik Bohlin (2009). Sympathy, Understanding, and Hermeneutics in Hume's Treatise. Hume Studies 35 (1-2):135-170.
Michael Ridge (2003). Epistemology Moralized: David Hume's Practical Epistemology. Hume Studies 29 (2):165-204.
Rico Vitz (2004). Sympathy and Benevolence in Hume's Moral Psychology. Journal of the History of Philosophy 42 (3):261-275.
Colin Heydt (2010). The Riddle of Hume's Treatise :Skepticism, Naturalism, and Irreligion (Review). Journal of the History of Philosophy 48 (3):401-402.
Sean Greenberg (2008). 'Naturalism' and 'Skepticism' in Hume's Treatise of Human Nature. Philosophy Compass 3 (4):721-733.
Jani Hakkarainen (2012). Hume's Scepticism and Realism. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 20 (2):283-309.
Added to index2011-12-02
Total downloads5 ( #229,825 of 1,102,917 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #84,702 of 1,102,917 )
How can I increase my downloads?