PS112: Modern and Contemporary Political Theory

Instructor: Fritz Krieg Allawey

APPARATUS FOR MORAL DECISION: TO REFUTE HUME’S
TREATISES OF HUMAN NATURE

Apparatus for moral decision is a manner of thinking. It is deemed to optimize a level of perception
in order to attain a logical reasoning into moral subject.
Book I: “Of the Understanding”
IDEAS

Microscope Fork Razor

Matter of Facts
Relations of Ideas
Book I of Hume’s Treatises of Human Nature deals with Epistemology, a branch of philosophy that
deals with knowledge. He had laid two arguments on how things are formed. First, simple ideas are formed
on the basis of impression through senses. And second, Complex Ideas, there are ideas forms from simple
ideas. He used 3 tools on how to gain ideas. First, the microscope is breaking down ideas into simpler
ideas. Second, the razor is anything that cannot be broken into simple ideas but ready for analysis is
meaningless. Third, the fork is truth can be divided into relations of ideas and matter of facts. Relations of
ideas are ideas which denial is inconceivable or self-contradictory-they are necessary truth e.g. triangles
have 3 sides. Matter of facts is knowledge through senses wherein they needs evidence.
On the Understanding and Knowing:
IDEAS & KNOWLEDGE

Microscope Telescope Fork Spoon

Matter of Facts Acceptance of the Unknowable

Relations of Idea in itself

Ideas
While it is true that ideas can be broken down into pieces (Microscope), we must also be aware that
there are things that we do not need to break down. First, not all ideas are made of simple ideas i.e. pizza
(complex) must be made of dough (simple) with bacon (simple). Second, when breaking an idea, we are
reducing the essence of the thing and deny the existence of being i.e. if pizza is made of dough and bacon,
then the essence of the pizza which is its being a pizza would be meaningless. If otherwise, we are
agreeing the fact that the only possible knowledge we can get is the simple ideas which is the essence of
the dough and the essence of the bacon and not the complex ideas which is the pizza and its essence. If
this is the case we could agree that complex ideas do not exist because we can break it down into pieces,
right? And thus, the telescope suggests that there are ideas that do not need to break down. Telescope
deals with the smaller concept, e.g. pizza; in order to understand the concept of pizza, we must accept the
concept of pizza not its ingredients. While microscope deals with the larger concept, e.g. universe; in order
to know universe, we must break the idea of universe and let cosmology and science do its job, that’s to
be precise and logical.
Since the fork deals with how we know- through senses and through self-contradictory things, it is
not much necessary to make an anti-thesis about it. The Razor which Hume regards as an idea which
cannot be broken down is meaningless is controversial. Reflecting upon the razor, we can say that
anything that is abstracted by the mind does not exist since the only knowledge we have is through senses
and through self-contradictory ideas. However if these ideas have foundation in reality regardless if this is
through senses or not, there is no sense of saying that it is meaningless (Acceptance of the unknowable).
The acceptance of the unknowable is something that which the mind can perceive but cannot defines i.e.
space, time and God. There is no assurance that this is meaningless and thus it is more acceptable to
accept it than to deny it. If we try to deny it, we are limiting knowledge to the things that only the mind
can perceive and thus, we are limiting ourselves to transcend and make moral judgment. It is harder to
deny space, time and God than to accept things like those. While it is unknowable, the idea which does not
reveal by human mind can be called “ideas in itself”. Ideas in itself must have something in itself because
it is abstracted by the mind. So to speak, the mind cannot perceive what does not exist and if the mind
can perceive something that exist then it must be perceivable and not meaningless. And so we removed

Prepared by: Jamiah O. Hulipas & Roland Mark M. Gatchalian

Bachelors of Arts in Political Science
PS112: Modern and Contemporary Political Theory
Instructor: Fritz Krieg Allawey
razor as a tool for ideas and replaced it with spoon. Razor has blade while spoon serves as a receptacle to
the food we eat-which towards our mouth.
This paper also suggests that it is not enough and not satisfying as humans to understand ideas but
we should also know and gain knowledge about the world. Knowledge as transcendental is essential to
human decision. To know the world is in a way transcending it; to know oneself is likewise to transcend
one’s self and thus, knowledge is not limited. The creative roles of our minds include approximation of the
truth and discovering the significance of life. Knowledge is now becoming a necessary stage to make a
moral judgment. Thus if we limit knowledge like a context of a book, we limit our mind to the context of
the book. It will make us weak in making moral judgment. Facts will gives as a sense of data which will
help us to make moral judgment less bias and conforms more to what is good. And wisdom that helps us
see the things beneath the fact. Yet, all forms of knowledge must have practical meaning and value. Thus,
this is a subject-object activity.
Book II: “Of the Passion”
Passion

Primary Impression Secondary Impression

Direct Passion

Indirect Passion
Hume’s believes that there are original impression and secondary impression. Original impressions
are impression through senses internal in the form of physical pleasure or pain. Secondary impressions are
always preceded by original impression. In secondary impression, passion resides. Passions are our
emotions. Passions have categories, direct passion and indirect passion. Direct passions are caused by
direct sensation of pain/pleasure e.g. aversion, grief, joy, hope, and fear. While the indirect passions are
caused by indirectly by sensation of pain/pleasure in conjunction with some other idea or impression e.g.
pride, humility, love, and hatred. Passion can also be a motivation which he defines that reasoning
regarding supposedly connected objects is not what makes us act. Instead, pleasure and pain give rise to
passion which motivates us.
Book II: “Of Passion and Reason”

Passion & Reason Conformity of Standard

Primary Impression Secondary Impression

Direct Passion

Indirect Passion
Controlled Passion
We agree with Hume’s belief of Passion, that there are original impression and secondary
impression, that there are direct passion and indirect passion. However, we disagree to his statement that
“reason is slave of passion”. If we accept his notion, then anything that we are doing is demand of our
emotions only. What is the use now of mind, knowledge and understanding? Hume is really skeptical. He
believes that the human nature of man is rational but he contradicts it that reason is a slave of passion.
His skepticism does not really cover the loophole of his argument and thus, we raise our proposition.
We have said in Book I “On Knowing” that it is a subjective-objective activity, thus, passion
(subjective) should work hand on hand with reason (objective). We feel passion or emotion because we
are “embodied”. The body is the access towards the world. Our bodies and our emotions are connected.
This is the direct passion for Hume, but he failed to discuss that passion or emotion can be trained too, we
can learn to be more sensitive to certain situations, like learning to control our anger. We believe that
direct sensation and indirect sensation falls short for it only explains direct and indirect pain and pleasure
and so, we suggest that direct and indirect passions have also a middle point, which we call it as
“controlled passion”. Controlled passions are emotions that we can control e.g. anger, faith, satisfaction,
and love. The word “controlled” does necessarily mean to manage and so, man can manage his emotions.
There is “controlled passion” because we are also a rational being. And we will not let this passion to
Prepared by: Jamiah O. Hulipas & Roland Mark M. Gatchalian
Bachelors of Arts in Political Science
PS112: Modern and Contemporary Political Theory
Instructor: Fritz Krieg Allawey
dictate us. If reason is the slave of passion, then there is no point on making things justifiable. But
because we can know and understand then we can reason out and examine passion. If we act without any
reason and examination then we act carelessly, if we act carelessly and we might end up hurting others.
Reason will make our passion logically correct. We suggest that reason will limit itself to the conformity of
standards. Conformity of standards is a correct act e.g. I will advise you because you did a bad thing.
Moreover, it will help us to avoid fallacy i.e. ad hominem, ad baculum etc...
Therefore, passion should work with reason in order to come up with more logical and more correct
moral judgment.
Book III: “Of Morals”
On Morals Moral Decision

Moral Decision affects action

Vice Virtue
Decision of reason does not affect
Natural action
Morality must be based on Reason
Artificial
The Book III deals with morals. The first part he makes a distinction of vice and virtue. Vice is associated
with pain while virtue is associated with pleasure. Under Virtue, there are natural virtue and artificial
virtue. Natural virtues are originated from nature. Artificial virtues are virtues defined according to society.
Second part deals with moral impression are caused by human actions. The third part, on the other hand,
deals with moral impression as social point and as caused by sympathy. The last part of his “Of morals”
deals with moral decision and reason. First, he believes that moral decision affects actions. Second, that
decision of reason does not. And lastly, that morality must not be based on reason. He suggests that we
examine ourselves with regard to any supposed moral misdeed. Example: If we reason out and examine
murder, we can claim that murder is not an act of morality or immorality. However, we can discover that
we have a strong dislike for murder. Thus, morality is supported by passion.
Book III: “On Morals and Moral Judgment”
On Morals Moral Decision

Evil Virtue Act Intent Circumstances

Mala in se Natural

Mala
Artificial
prohibita
Morals are an act done in accordance with mostly accepted and deemed good values in any
society. While Morals have notions by which a society would consider it as good values. These notions we
suggest are Virtue and Evil. Clearly, these two are not totally opposite. We did not replace virtue with
goodness because there is no such thing as artificial goodness. These two shared in common feature that
is they have defined by the nature and society. Under virtue is the natural and artificial virtue. Natural
Virtue by which Hume has defined is virtue originated from nature e.g. generosity is universal virtue while
the artificial virtue is defined according to society e.g. chastity e.g. pre-marital sex in the Philippines looks
bad but good in U.S. On the other hand, we added evil because evil can be also defined in the society.
Under evil is mala in se and mala prohibita. Mala in se is evil in nature by which everyone accepts it as
evil e.g. killing while mala prohibita is evil because the law prohibits it e.g. Jaywalking is evil because the
law prohibits it. If we take these two into consideration, we would derive a better action towards society by
which the society accepts it as good values.
Moral decision must also be based on the act, on the intent, and on the circumstances. We
disagreed to Hume’s argument that if we reason out murder we would come to conclusion that murder is
neither bad nor good but by strong feeling of dislike that makes act of murder becomes bad. Hume limits
his reasoning only to the subjective and avoids the objective. Well, we suggest that moral decision is an
examination of act (Is generosity good?), on the intent (should I give?) and on the circumstances (does it
help other people?). If we let our passion and reason to work on these things, there is an assurance that
moral decision will conforms to the norms of ethics.

Prepared by: Jamiah O. Hulipas & Roland Mark M. Gatchalian

Bachelors of Arts in Political Science