Treatise of Human Nature

(excerpt)
David Hume

Of the Influencing Motives of the Will

In philosophy and everyday life, there's often a discussion about the conflict between reason and emotion, with reason
being favored as the guide to virtuous behavior. Many believe that people should always act according to reason,
resisting other motivations until they align with reason. However, this view is flawed.

- First, reason alone cannot motivate action. It primarily deals with abstract ideas, not real-world decisions. For
example, while mathematics is useful, it doesn't directly drive our actions; it only helps us understand cause
and effect.
- Second, our actions are more often influenced by our emotions, which prompt us to seek pleasure or avoid
pain. Emotions extend beyond the immediate object to its causes and effects. Reason comes into play by
helping us understand these connections, but it doesn't drive our actions; it only guides them based on our
emotional responses.

Since reason can't directly produce action, it also can't prevent or override our emotions. If reason could oppose
emotion, it would have to be able to cause action independently, which it cannot. Instead, reason serves the passions,
helping us understand and navigate our emotions but not controlling them. This might sound unusual, but it's
supported by further examination.

Passion and Reason

● Passion vs. Reason: People often talk about passion and reason as if they're fighting each other. They say
reason should always win, but that's not always true.
● What Passion Is: When you feel something strongly, like anger or joy, it's a passion. It's not a copy of
something else—it's just a feeling, like when you're thirsty.
● Reason and Passion Don't Always Disagree: People think passions are unreasonable when they're based on
wrong ideas or when they choose the wrong actions. But if a passion isn't based on a mistake, reason doesn't
oppose it. (Example: Let's say you really want some fruit because you think it tastes great. But if someone proves to you
that the fruit isn't actually tasty, your desire for it goes away. Reason wins without a fight because your passion was based
on a wrong idea.)
● Different Passions: Some passions are calm and don't make you feel much, like kindness or the desire for
good things. Others, like resentment when someone hurts you or fear when you're in danger, are stronger.
● Both Passions and Reason Influence Us: Sometimes we act against our best interests, even though reason
says we shouldn't. Other times, we resist strong passions to do what's best for us. It's not always easy to decide
what to do when passions and reason disagree.

Morality and Perception

● Perceptions: Everything our mind does—seeing, hearing, feeling—falls under perceptions. These perceptions
can be divided into impressions (strong feelings) and ideas (thoughts).
● Morality and Perceptions: When we judge something as morally good or bad, it's just another kind of
perception.
● How We Judge Morality: Some people say morality comes from reason alone. They think there are eternal
right and wrong things that everyone can figure out just by thinking about them.
● Question: So, do we judge right and wrong based on our thoughts or our feelings?
● Different Opinions: Some say it's all about reason, while others think feelings play a big role too.
 ● Experience Says Feelings Matter: We see that people often act based on their feelings about what's right or
wrong, not just what they think.
● Conclusion: Since our feelings and actions are influenced by morality, and reason alone can't influence
feelings or actions, morality can't just come from reason. It's more about our emotions.
● Final Argument: Reason is about finding truth or falsehood, but feelings and actions can't be true or false.
So, they can't be judged as reasonable or unreasonable.

- In Short, Morality isn't just about reason; it's more about our feelings and actions. Reasons can't control our
actions directly, so it can't be the source of moral judgments like right or wrong.

Reason's Influence on Conduct- Reason can affect our behavior in two main ways: by informing us about things that
excite our emotions, or by helping us understand cause-and-effect relationships that allow us to act on our emotions.

● Errors in Judgment: Sometimes, we make mistakes in judgment, like thinking something will bring pleasure
when it won't, or choosing the wrong means to achieve our goals. These errors might affect our actions, but
they're usually innocent mistakes and don't make us morally bad. (Example: If I see a fruit from far away and
mistakenly think it's delicious, and then choose the wrong way to reach it, these are errors, but they don't make me a bad
person.)
● Mistakes of Right and Wrong: Some say that mistaking what's right or wrong can lead to immorality. But
this assumes there's a real right and wrong independent of our judgments, which is a separate issue.
● Actions and Judgment: Our actions might lead others to make false judgments, like thinking something
untrue about us based on what they see. But our actions don't directly cause these judgments in ourselves, so
they can't be the source of all immorality.
● Conclusion: The distinction between moral good and evil can't come from reason alone because it affects our
actions, which reason alone can't control. Reason might prompt or direct our actions, but the judgments caused
by our actions don't give those actions moral qualities.
● Eternal Moral Truths: Some philosophers say morality can be proven like geometry, but they haven't
succeeded. If morality could be demonstrated, it would have to be based on some relationships between
things, but no one has been able to clearly define what those relationships are.

Morality and Moral Laws

● Confusion in Defining Morality: If morality is based on relations that can be demonstrated with certainty,
then it must be confined to relations like resemblance, contrariety, degrees in quality, and proportions in
quantity and number. However, applying these relations to inanimate objects would imply that even they could
be considered morally good or bad.
● Conditions for a Sound System of Morality: Any system claiming that morality is based on relations needs
to meet two conditions: (1) The relations must only apply between internal actions and external objects, and
not to internal actions compared to each other or external objects compared among themselves. (2) It must
show a necessary connection between these relations and the will, proving that they universally influence
every rational mind.
● Challenges to the Notion of Eternal Moral Laws: It's difficult to establish eternal moral laws because no
relations can be shown upon which such a distinction may be founded. Additionally, it's impossible to prove a
priori that these relations, if they existed, would universally influence every rational mind.
- Examples to Illustrate the Argument: The example of incest in humans versus animals demonstrates
that the perception of moral turpitude depends on reason. Animals may have sense, appetite, and will,
but their lack of reason prevents them from perceiving moral duties. Morality must exist
independently of reason, as reason merely discovers it.
● Morality as a Matter of Feeling, Not Fact: Vices and virtues are not matters of fact that can be inferred by
reason. For example, in the case of murder, examining the action reveals only passions, motives, volitions, and
thoughts. The judgment of vice arises from a sentiment of disapprobation within oneself, not from any
inherent quality in the action itself.
 ● Comparison to Sensory Perceptions: Morality, like sensory perceptions such as sounds or colors, is a
perception in the mind rather than a quality inherent in objects. Our sentiments of pleasure and uneasiness
towards actions are what ultimately guide our behavior.

SUMMARY:

- The module is about how people usually talk about what's right and wrong. In discussions about morality,
people often start by talking about things like whether God exists or how humans behave. But then, suddenly,
they switch to saying what people "should" or "shouldn't" do.

- When people start saying what others "should" do, they're implying a new kind of idea or rule. And this new
idea needs to be explained. How can we be sure it's connected to the other ideas we were talking about before?
This is a question that isn't usually answered in these discussions.

- The author suggests that if we paid more attention to this shift in moral arguments, we might realize that the
way we think about right and wrong isn't just based on logical reasoning or facts alone.

In simpler terms, the writer is saying that when we talk about morality, we often start by discussing facts or logical
arguments. But then we suddenly switch to talking about what people "should" do without explaining why. This shift
is important because it raises questions about how these ideas are connected. If we thought more about this, we might
realize that morality isn't just about facts or logic—it's also about how we feel and what we think is right or
wrong.