David Hume and the Problem of Reason Recovering the Human Sciences John W. Danford Yale Universiy Press New Haven and Londonepi © 1850 Yale. For Karen A rhs rene "Ta hk ay be phd ec i pt, bg tas ay ew Bose at pig i! by Sen Han fe US. Cag La ed ecb reson te pc res, at itn prison fe pin Dei y Seni San, Stn Balmer py The Comping Rom of Mii, a ula Uae Sate fA by Baa, a, te, Mickie iyo Ging Cabin Rb Da sf, John W Dl Hae and te pee fae: ering tment W, Dain ho lan ingpiodn 1 Hn, Di, -7I6-—Cnun in nc of seme, 2 Reon, 1 Til woes 90 mao sas ar “The erin hk ct epi of permanence nd hii be Comin Pin ain fr Bask Lang fe Coun on iy Ree bosresssetwere | curren s owrren 5 curren 6 curren 7 urna s own 9 Contents Aebaledgnents ix Wks Cited inthe Tet i Itdaction 1 Scirwe and Truth 16 Humes it Frmaltion ofthe Probie of Reason 26 Humes Preece nd the Separation of Scie ad Experione 0 “One the Met Sublime Quetions” 62 Ths Gres Barby Mista” History and Relativion 86 "The Gradual Pres of Iprevenens History and Palit! Bionomy 109 “The Dismal Drs: Pile ond Morals 136 “The Suet Fndations Pilly ond Religion 164 Gonclasion 187Neer 185 Alc Bilgraphy 25 Inder 219 Acknowledgments have inured numerous debi, bd intellectual and ter, daring the years have worked on this bok. 1 ‘began wring it while the beneficiary of « Faculty Development Leave fromthe Universi of Houton in 1983-84, Lam indebted othe Social Sades Faculty Cer of Oxoed University, which provide me with lfc space, ces to ibrar, and congenial amo- sphere fr wring, In parla Tam gate to Zig- cr Felesaki of Pembroke College for is generous support and encouragement and to Mary Oxford of the Faculy Cente fr her councous aeiance. 1 ‘woul also Fike o thank Enders and Jane Ae Wim bush, hen of Chrbury, England, fr excessive hos: pity am indebted tothe National Endowment forthe Hoamantes, fram which I rccved 2 Senor Fe- lowship for Independent Study in 1986-87, which pe me the ime to complete the study. Ham gael to Libeny Fund, of Idanapalis, Indiana, for exe- leat conferences that gave me the opprtiiy to ry fut some ideas and to meet caleagus fom oher wives with similar interes. ‘Many individual have contd i one way oF nother In pair Iam gata wo Joseph Ham- burger, Tom Pangle, David Brady, Donsié Late, Darrell Dobbs, Tony Sgnan, Nik Capaldi, Dari Miller, and John Gray, John Ackerman sgeted ju dios revisions that improved the erly chapters Doral Livington, who red the manuscrp for Yale: Adsladgmets Universi Pres, feed exec hpi crmments which ed wo sme Jmpronements inthe sty. Nae ofthese invidual gees wth ever thing Uy, hereof eewhere, even dng have ie to sow ea the ‘or of is ways. All the mistakes and inflicts are mine alone. T would ew express my gratitude o Sacey Mandetbaum of Yale University Pres whore penpicaious editing inpoved my prone and 0 thee of ty studens—Bob Lichescin, Nancy Olver, snd Kate Tra ‘vere—who generously helped wit dhe proofed Par of this Book have already appeared in pint. Chaper 9 origina by appeared ap "The Sure Foundtin of Morin’: The Poll “Teaching of Hume's Dials concerning Notwral Religion,” Western Political Quarterly 35 Juve 1982). Pars of chapters 7 and 8 appeated in ‘he same jural ax “Hime on Development: The First Vales of he Hor of Eland” $2 (Marc 1989). Adapted by pernison ofthe Universi of Utah, eopeight hale Finally, I want to acknowledge the uniling assistance and encour agement of my wife, Karen Pak Dunford, who time and again iner- tuple ber own studs to elp an impomible husband (ao to mena baring and raising two len). Fora debe quite simply beyond ‘measur, this book i dete wo er Abstract BHU ‘ECPM AL Works Cited in the Text Unless Ihave noted otherwise ll works ate by Hume ad ate ced by page An Abstract ofa Treatise of Human Nature od JM. Keynes and P. Srffa, Hamden: Archon, 1965 Dialogues concerning Natural Religion, ed. Now ‘man Kerap Smith, London: Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1947, sys, Moral, Palitial, and Literary, ed, Eugene F. Mller. Indianapolis: Liberty, 198, Enguires concerning Human Undersanding LEHU] ond comerning the Principles of Morals TECPMI, ed L.A. Selby-Bigge ced. rev P.H, Niddtch. Oxford: Clarendon, 1975. "Thomas Hobbes, The Elements of Law, ed. Ferdi- rand Tonnies. London: Frank Cas, 1969. (Ct- ced by past, chapter, and paragmph, respec tively) John Locke, An Essay concerning Human Uader- ‘Standing, collated and annotated by Alexander ‘Campbell Fraser. New York: Dover, 1959. (it ed by book, chapter, and paragraph.) ‘The Hisery of England: From the Invasion of Julins Casar tothe Revolution in 1688, based on theLeviathan HR PK Werks Cll in he Tat Edition of 178, with the Author's Last Cote: tions and. Improvements. 6 vos. Indianapolis Libeay, 198. (There i no eri ein, and this recent edition isthe only one widely sal able. Ged by volume and page.) The Leters of Dovid Hue, e J.Y.T. Gig 2 ‘ols. Oxrd: Clarendon, 122. (ied by volume and page) ‘Thomas Hobbes, Leiathan, ed. C. B. Macpher son. Harmondsworth, England: Penguin, 1968, (Cited by cither chapter or chapter and page) ‘The Natal Hisory of Religion, cdl. HE. Root Sanford: Stanford University Press, 1957 Gorge Bele, Tea cmcering the Prnc- plsof Hunan Bred ed. Clin M, Turban. Indianapolis: Bobbe-Mersil, 1957, (Cited by pt and paragraph) A Troatie of Human Nature, ed. Le A. Slby- Bigge. 2d ed. with text revised and variant read- ings by P. H. Niddltch. Oxford: Clarendon, 97. Introduction What can justify another booksengh study of the iting of Dav Hume? Many jusifcains could be ‘fered: the abyamal sate of our underanding of ‘how economics elated o human ature, contempo- ray ignorance about the rature, power ed pial itporance of religous fuith, widespread interes in the foundations of natural since—to name only thee poles On these sb and many more, Hime as great del teach, But his importance is ‘more fundamen. This bok is abou Hume, but itis also about 3 problem, The problem has been inlict in moderiy since the epitemolgial revouon of the seventeenth centary but la suraced as what one sight eal social peoblem only daring the eweneth ceowury. Not only was Humes one of the greatest ‘minds ever to tlle on what Vell the problem of ‘reason, but these elections wet, in my dgment, t the cote f his ene pilnopicie [A the fundamental lee, the problem of reason involves the cans about knowledge and is found tions which were made by such funders of moder rar science as Thomas Hobbes and René Des- ‘ares, But the wurfce maifatios ofthe problem ane fia event the general population. They are probably moat eidet to teaches who confront daily the wholesale reli tht leads sudens (and for hat mater mos social sents) to dey tha one can know” anvhing about, for example, what is god and bad for human beings, since jdents about 12 Indrdacton tg and bd are not about ts and, propery speaking, knowledge Inwohes the fatal teal, Young peopl an very quickly today that arguments can be aside, or ended, by aserions of the relay of ‘nha thy cll vals. This spares ther 4 grea deal of he hard work af thinking or marsaling evidence o support a chim oe a argent. Is ‘easier delne to defend ons views on the road tht they stem for Tlie which are personal and subjective chan to argue ratonally in favor ofa portion oe asserts is treo ight Relat i ths fen 2 cowards refuge; but, more inporant for the way we study human tings and sec, deprives us ofthe possi of raiona inguin that were once the central questions of the sel sckences and especially ‘pail scence: How sould weve? Whats goad and ba for human ings? What srt of soins bes? Liberal demicracies or, mate precisely, liberal commercial re publics, are the Fie of 4 revelation in our understanding of what it mnean to be human, and of cur retin o nature, the reat revolution understood orginal a the eat of modernity gaint the ancients, and ely asociated with the ise f moder natural scence. The founders tf modernity understood the pois order flow from the ees of individual harman beingy and aot as something that existed prior 10 indvidal, They cnphasized rights ver dais and taught hat en and women are ot plical annals at east ot in the sense the ancients ‘acd othe tem. They tug that eons propery rede nots ‘ome sort of dvive element in hua, ik the odor God bt a too which can serve the only abate, natural human end: sural or ‘omforable sll preenating. Av sch, reson canbe expt in on “quest ofthe fundamentally haste nature in whi aman beings find thems. This too this “new oration” at Bacon called iti what we call ocr natural science Ks goal ist “subdue and orercome the recess and miseries of humanity.” Al dhe hopes of modernity ze Connected none way or another with hin etre. The igh of science fas illuminate the dark recs of superiion and igporance and Fnumaniy wold Nourish as never before thanks tothe wats discovered Introdation 3 by unfeuered reason. "The soil an pital order, moral isa were to have 3 new-—and rational—ground, Hopes lie thes, however, were last expressed by sophisticated peo- ple nar the cose ofthe nineteenth een, and thir exession was lead quite ae the. By the beginning of oar entry it wan accepted tha the wuths of moder scence are only more myths, chat they are invened not discovered, dat there is no univer or wasshitrcl reason capable of procing trnshiorcl truth Al lly are reat, allalues merely cultural or temporal. This philosophical development abe all, however remot om the minds of ordinary men and wornen fring about thir business, is contbted wo the pewaive reas rote above? What does David Hume have todo with i? To se hat rsa ook at 3 second consideration: the oan of pilsopy. here is ohn oigial in the observation tht philosophy —once the quem ofthe cences—has been rece 1 pata state fel vance inthe contemporary academy and indeed in the contemporaty world A review of A.J Ayer's Pip inthe Tenth Cnty, fo ‘example, bin withthe obsesaton that day “thinking people who ae ot themselves philosophers ta so say nen al inelleculs— ay amon no attention othe subject”? The reviewer suggest that his has something wo do with he incres of whathe clei igo pliloopy, cause by philosopher’ atenpt to be more “peofessional. and condudes dat probably “pilsophy can be ether profeonally competent or scaly sgitiant bu never bth a the same tine." The increasingly serie and technical concerns of academic philosophers today hae ot been fred up ter, however. Why iit that “te big questions rearing the word of harman aes ate simply not being Aste, le alone answered, by proesoalphilosphers”? “The same founders of merit who ined the challenge to an- cent nd medieval philosophy underood that anew understanding of plilsoply sel must be pr of thi program. Although this theme will be comidered explicit in chapters 2 and 3, we can sketch the sues brill ere, The ance pica pliloupher, begining with Socrates,