Thus, by Reid's account, the definition of cause is absurd, and cannot hold (sp) any value. Reid's example is severely (sp) lacking in rational thinking, but one cannot blame him too much due to the time period in which he resided. The fact of the matter is that day is not the cause of night, nor is night the cause of day.
As the Earth rotates on its axis, half of the Earth is bathed in the Sun's light, while the other half is in darkness. Thus the Sun is the cause of both day and night, not day the cause of night and vice versa.
General Editors: David Bourget (Western Ontario) David Chalmers (ANU, NYU) Area Editors: David Bourget Gwen Bradford Berit Brogaard Margaret Cameron David Chalmers James Chase Rafael De Clercq Ezio Di Nucci Barry Hallen Hans Halvorson Jonathan Ichikawa Michelle KoschØystein Linnebo Jee Loo Liu Paul Livingston Brandon Look Manolo Martínez Matthew Mc Grath Michiru Nagatsu Susana Nuccetelli Giuseppe Primiero Jack Alan Reynolds Darrell P.
Rowbottom Aleksandra Samonek Constantine Sandis Howard Sankey Jonathan Schaffer Thomas Senor Robin Smith Daniel Star Jussi Suikkanen Lynne Tirrell Aness Webster Other editors Contact us Learn more about Phil Papers General Editors: David Bourget (Western Ontario) David Chalmers (ANU, NYU) Area Editors: David Bourget Gwen Bradford Berit Brogaard Margaret Cameron David Chalmers James Chase Rafael De Clercq Ezio Di Nucci Barry Hallen Hans Halvorson Jonathan Ichikawa Michelle KoschØystein Linnebo Jee Loo Liu Paul Livingston Brandon Look Manolo Martínez Matthew Mc Grath Michiru Nagatsu Susana Nuccetelli Giuseppe Primiero Jack Alan Reynolds Darrell P.
They are a revised version of his earlier work A Treatise of Human Nature which appeared in 1739. This material is put online to further the educational goals of Liberty Fund, Inc. C.4 glasgow new york toronto melbourne wellington bombay calcutta madras karachi lahore dacca cape town salisbury nairobi ibadan accra kuala lumpur hong kong IMPRESSION OF 1963 SECOND EDITION 1902 PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN in the ‘Enquiry concerning Human Understanding.’ The marginal sections have been introduced merely for convenience of reference, and for the clearer articulation of the argument, and do not correspond to anything in the original edition.
Unless otherwise stated in the Copyright Information section above, this material may be used freely for educational and academic purposes. Three comparative tables of contents are given at the end of the Introduction, showing the relation of the two Enquiries and the Dissertation on the Passion to the three books of the Treatise.
this Introduction aims chiefly at making clear the relation between them.
Hume composed his Treatise between the ages of twenty-one and twenty-five, finishing it in the year 1736. Hume says himself that the Treatise ‘fell dead-born from the press without reaching such distinction as even to excite a murmur among the zealots.’ That distinction was, to the end of his life, particularly dear to Hume, and it will be seen that in the Enquiries he made a bold bid for it in his quite superfluous section on Miracles and a Particular Providence.
By others it has been treated as an interesting indication of the character of a man who had long ago given up philosophy, who always had a passion for applause, and little respect or generosity for his own failures. Grose the Advertisement is regarded as ‘the posthumous utterance of a splenetic invalid,’ and Mr.
Green’s elaborate criticism is directed almost entirely against the Treatise.