philosophy
Isn't David Hume's conception of the principle of causality, and the doubt he casts on the ability to reach the conclusion that our senses lead us to, that everything is the result of a cause and effect, itself a form of empiricism? Hume also came to cast this doubt from his observation of the world. Isn't that so?
לגלות עוד מהאתר הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
0 Answers
There is a daily assumption that what is not empirical is not acceptable. This itself is of course not an empirical assumption.
Arriving at doubt from observing the world is completely consistent with his method. If you observed and didn't see something, you doubt it. What's inconsistent here?
לגלות עוד מהאתר הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
השאר תגובה
Please login or Register to submit your answer