Inquiry and Essays

by Thomas Reid, Keith Lehrer, Ronald E. Beanblossom (Editor)

Reid’s previously published writings are substantial, both in quantity and quality. This edition attempts to make these writings more readily available in a single volume. Based upon Hamilton’s definitive two volume 6th edition, this edition is suitable for both students and scholars.

Beanblossom and Lehrer have included a wide range of topics addressed by Reid. These topics include Reid’s views on the role of common sense, scepticism, the theory of ideas, perception, memory and identity, as well as his views on moral liberty, duties, and principles. Historical as well as topical considerations guided the selection process. Thus, Reid’s responses to Descartes, Locke, Berkeley, and Hume are included. Through the resulting selections Reid’s influence and impact upon subsequent philosophers is manifested.

Genres: Philosophy, Classics, Essays, Nonfiction

432 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1764

About the author

The Reverend Thomas Reid FRSE, a religiously trained Scottish philosopher and a contemporary of David Hume, was the founder of the Scottish School of Common Sense and played an integral role in the Scottish Enlightenment. The early part of his life was spent in Aberdeen, Scotland, where he created the 'Wise Club' (a literary-philosophical association) and graduated from the University of Aberdeen. He was given a professorship at King's College, Aberdeen in 1752, where he wrote An Inquiry Into the Human Mind on the Principles of Common Sense (published in 1764). Shortly afterwards he was given the prestigious Professorship of Moral Philosophy at the University of Glasgow when he was called to replace Adam Smith. He resigned from this position in 1781.

Reid believed that common sense (in a special philosophical sense of sensus communis) is, or at least should be, at the foundation of all philosophical inquiry. He disagreed with Hume, who asserted that we can never know what an external world consists of as our knowledge is limited to the ideas in the mind, and George Berkeley, who asserted that the external world is merely ideas in the mind. By contrast, Reid claimed that the foundations upon which our sensus communis are built justify our belief that there is an external world.

Reviews

[Jacob Aitken · Rating 5 out of 5]

Responding to skeptics, Reid notes that our beliefs are formed by our very constitution (40-41). We cannot always give a justifying foundation for every belief (indeed, for most), yet only a fool would say we are irrational in holding beliefs a...z. In fact, to use modern parlance, our natural condition is a belief-creating mechanism (see his famous quote on p. 118); indeed, one created by God. Along the way Reid, to anticipate Nicholas Wolterstorff, gives a fascinating retelling of the history of modern philosophy (pp. 106ff, 244). He ends with a discussion on what counts as "First Principles."

Thomas Reid was responding to the idealism of Locke, Berkeley, and Hume. In a nutshell, and woefully oversimplifying what they believed, they said that in every act of memory there are two objects, one mental object in my head and the external, mediate object in real life. One of the dangers of this thought is that the external object, when the process is pushed to the limit, is dropped, leaving only as real the internal objects.

Reid’s answer to skepticism came like a summer rain: God created my brain in such a way, assuming I don’t have a concussion or something, that he will not deceive me. If I can use the laws of logic and grammar to understand what the Skeptic says about something difficult then I can understand something simple as when the prophet Isaiah tells me that the Servant suffered for the sins of my people (to use an example from hermeneutics).

But someone can respond, “Well, how do you know your mental faculties are working accordingly?” There are several responses:
I can return the question, “They must be working well enough for me to understand your question.”

This was Reid’s answer: Forgo the question right away. Simply suppose he is merry. If you find out he is serious, then suppose him mad.

The book was actually...fun. Reid is among the foremost prose stylist of English philosophy (I suppose that isn't a great feat). While this edition is abridged, it's not really a problem as it is the referenced edition among current Warrant studies.

[Tyler · Rating 4 out of 5]

I didn't read the book through and through, but I read what seemed to be most important (at least, to me). One of the last essays on Reid's ethical theory I have already read in a different anthology. To the reviewer that said he was a nobody, or had little impact, or whatever nonsense it was, while you may be true, his ideas are far better than what philosophers pretend to know now. Common sense trumps these mysterious philosophical concepts that we have nowadays. All in all, while the first inquiry seemed to be useless, On The Intellectual Powers was certainly the best of this anthology of Reid's work. He explains the ambiguity of other philosophers, and the faults of Bishop Berkeley and David Hume. Reid makes it seemingly laughable that anyone would even take their work serious. I only rate this 4 stars because An Inquiry didn't really inform me much, however, the next two sections of the book (including the one on ethics) were great and I think succeed in the taking down of nonsensical philosophy.

[Daniel Stepke · Rating 5 out of 5]

fantastic, fantastic--genuinely tempted to read the whole thing; so rare to see a really self-aware philosopher

[Sean Brenon · Rating 5 out of 5]

I’ll give a fuller review when I’m finished.

Reid entered my radar because John Witherspoon replaced Edwards’ Berkeleyan ‘mind of God’ nonsense with Scottish Common Sense Realism, of which Reid was the paragon. Much of Reid’s premise goes something like this: ‘Look, if you doubt your own existence, you’re either being dishonest or you’re a lunatic.’

As such, Reid is probably the single most humorous philosopher I’ve ever read, and his aim to demystify and simplify a non-skeptical view of external reality is refreshing and practical. It was a perfect fit for post-Revolution America, and I have no doubt that Witherspoon’s decision to direct American intellectualism in that way played a major part of America’s ascendance into the worldwide economy.

[Davis Smith · Rating 3 out of 5]

Reid is one of the more entertaining philosophers in a century where philosophy is largely deadly dull to read. The Common Sense approach has a lot of merit and is worth considering.

[E. · Rating 4 out of 5]

I first read Thomas Reid in preparation for my general exams and then completed this collection when I was done with the major work on my dissertation and reading philosophy not related to it. Now I returned to it as my now almost decade long project of reading back through the philosophical canon chronologically. I had forgotten how clearly, concisely, and with such common sense he responds to, or even takes down, key theories in modern philosophy. I felt the same about Reid that I did two decades ago, that many of his ideas are more fully developed in later thinkers, including the American Pragmatists. He remains one of those secondary figures in our tradition, but worth reacquainting myself with him.

One funny reading experience--finding myself laughing outloud at a good joke he made, only to turn to the back of the book and see that twenty years ago I had indexed that page as "a good joke." I guess it made me laugh out loud both times. Here's the joke: "It seemed very natural to think, that the 'Treatise of Human Nature required an author, and a very ingenious one too; but now we learn that it is only a set of ideas which came together and arranged themselves by certain associations and attractions." Yeah, only philosophers are going to cackle to that.

[Greg · Rating 3 out of 5]

Reid, a less well known member of the Scottish Enlightenment (Hume, Adam Smith, et al.), attempts to refute Hume and Berkeley by showing the errors in sceptical idealism that lead to paradox. Were Berkeley really as sceptical as he claims of the truth in the senses, he would be walking into lampposts. Reid is a forerunner of the American pragmatists who would come 150 years later. It is merely as a footnote in history that Reid is important. Hume had much greater impact in his day and in the history of philosophy.

This text is an abridgment of the works in question. It is "just the good parts."

[Xander Duffy · Rating 4 out of 5]

I disagree with Gregs account, it is. It only as a footnote in history that makes Reid important. He essentially founded important aspects of perception in psychology, as well as Hume directly and respectfully addressing Dr Reid in the preface to his Inquiry into human understanding, mainly due to the fact that Reids argument against Hume was powerful, intriguing and thorough. I found this a highly enlightening and very original piece of philosophical work.

[M.G. Bianco · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting "common sense" approach to knowing.