HOME BIRGOGRADE BRIED

Following Berkeley, he believed that since experience consists in the perceiving of something unknown to us, all possible subjects of knowledge are only our perceptions. Hume divided these perceptions, depending on their liveliness and strength, or the sensations directly experienced by us, and ideas or ideas. Huma considers ideas to be more or less bright copies of sensations created by imagination and reason from the material delivered by feelings.

According to the yum, the transformation of sensations into ideas is carried out due to the ability to “associate” the sensations with each other according to the principles of similarity, adjacency in time or space and the relationship of the cause and action. So, the idea of ​​God arises from us from ideas about our own mind and power, which thinking combines according to the principle of adjacency and on the principle of similarity, builds into an excellent degree.

Similarly, from the sensations of individual things, our thinking creates the ideas of their types, clans, substance, numbers, figures, etc. The whole content of human consciousness is, either, the pure relations between ideas, or the facts of experience in which the sensations are always mixed with the ideas created. Mathematics are engaged in objects of the first kind, whose judgments of the for example.

The subjects of the second kind are studied by physics and other empirical sciences, whose judgments, as well as in general, all relations established by the experimental way, are based only on the idea of ​​the connection of causes and action. But on what basis do we assume that two facts are interconnected by a causal attitude? Since the investigation is a fact that is completely different from the cause, it cannot be intuitively seen in the cause and is logically derived from it.

Hume convincingly shows that no phenomenon of causality can know A priori lat. Before establishing a causal connection of facts, we must certainly make sure of it on experience - repeatedly test it a posteriori lat. But what do we perceive every time in sensory experience before making a conclusion about the causal connection of facts among ourselves? Obviously, only constant adherence to one fact after another, nothing more.

However, "after this" does not mean "because of this." No matter how many times before one fact followed after another, this does not prove that it is really caused by what precedes it, and always, if necessary, will follow the fact considered its cause. What then are all our conclusions from experience, if not on what we feel, not on intuition and not on the logical conclusion of the consequences from the causes?

According to the good, the actual basis of any experienced knowledge, in the CTs, constantly observing the repetition of the same phenomena after others, we are so accustomed to this that we begin to consider the ideas we associate for impressions of real objects. So, it states Hume, experience is not only from sensory data. In addition to them, the activity of the mind takes part in it, based on the habit in a certain way to combine ideas with each other.

This habit serves as a source of our faith in the existence of ourselves, external reality and pushing the universe of causal relations. The universality and the need for the causal relationship of phenomena is thus the product of our spirit. What reality in itself, we do not know, and we cannot know. But since the source of all our ideas is ultimately sensations, that faith Belief.

According to Hume, it is one of the main instincts rooted in the nature of man. Belief in the existence of universal and necessary connection between phenomena saves people from complete skepticism and agnosticism, that is, unbelief in the cognitiveness of the world, allowing them to act in the world of external nature, and in a society of their own behavior as moral creatures.

Thanks to this practical instinct, there are all empirical sciences, as well as religion and philosophy. The latter, however, should not be a dogmatic - interpreting about what cannot be proved mathematically or established experimentally. The destiny of philosophy is moderate skepticism, that is, a conscious restriction of their research by those objects that, by the power of the human mind, very limited even when it reaches its perfection.