David Hume, philosopher, historian, economist, librarian, and essayist, was one of the great figures of the European Enlightenment. Unlike some of his famous contemporaries, however, he was not dogmatically committed to idealised conceptions of reason, liberty, and progress. Instead, Hume was a sceptic whose arguments questioned the reach and authority of human rationality, and who put the rivalrous passions of commercial life at the centre of his theory of human nature. He believed that the modern world was in many ways superior to the ancient world, but was acutely conscious of the threats to peace and progress posed by bigotry, factionalism, and imperialism. Today Hume's works continue to speak to us powerfully in an age of instability and uncertainty.
This Very Short Introduction presents a balanced account of Hume's thought, giving equal attention to his work on human nature, morality, politics, and religion. Weaving together biography, the historical context, and a thoughtful exposition of Hume's arguments, James A. Harris offers a compelling picture of a thinker who had no disciples and formed no school, but whom no one in his own time was able to ignore, and who has since become central to modern philosophy's understanding of itself.
Very Short Introductions : Brilliant, Sharp, Inspiring
ABOUT THE The Very Short Introductions series from Oxford University Press contains hundreds of titles in almost every subject area. These pocket-sized books are the perfect way to get ahead in a new subject quickly. Our expert authors combine facts, analysis, perspective, new ideas, and enthusiasm to make interesting and challenging topics highly readable.
Hume was a Scottish author, historian, politician and philosopher who died in 1776. His writings focused on ethics, causality, free will and skirts around atheism (including why we shouldn’t believe in miracles and criticisms of Christianity.) His religious beliefs caused controversies but he dodged harsher consequences from these. The book starts with a brief biography and then delves into his career, as he focused on different topics throughout his life.
Hume was a polymath, as shown by the variety of topics he wrote on, including a massive history of England. He also worked at the British embassy in Paris. There he got into conflict with the French philosopher Rousseau. He wrote a treatise on the fight to preempt Rousseau’s treatise, with the whole ordeal as being what he considered one of the worst things to have ever happened to him.
Radical for his day, most if not all his views would be considered mundane and mainstream today.
No introduction to Hume at all but a convoluted, messy, and nauseating read. It’s not presented as a summary at all because it Is ripped straight from Ayer’s advanced lectures on Hume. It was not written to be a Very Short Introduction. Ayer’s language is complicated, and he cannot present Hume’s ideas without challenging them and explaining why he was wrong. Do not bother reading, it’s no way to understand what Hume believed at all.
Frankly speaking, I decided to read about Hume, as it was he who had awakened Kant from his dogmatic slumber, so this reading was purposed as a means to an end. The book (however introductory it might be) has completely changed my rudimentary opinion Hume, as the one worth being an absolutely glorious end and has given me quite a good overview, what his thinking was about. So now I think, instead of jumping right away into Kant, I'll pause for some time and read Hume himself. Thanks Prof. Harris
Solid and readable, but my search any--literally, *any*--explanation of why Hume is so beloved by pure philosopher types continues. I get why conservatives love him, and much better Hume than Burke on that count. I get why sceptics love him. But why do so many English philosophers love him? He's not good at that stuff! Come on!
idk, i guess this just isn’t my cup of tea? some good insights in the book which made it worth finishing but i never found myself particularly absorbed or thrilled by any part of it
Kind of an uninteresting read, but covers the basics well enough. I don’t feel like I got much more out of this than just reading some Wikipedia entries though.
Much better than the previous VSI entry on Hume. I especially liked the bits about his economic thought which answered some questions I've been pondering about the history of economics.