What do you think?
Rate this book
The Giants of Philosophy
David Hume
David Hume sought to create a comprehensive "science of man" in order to understand human nature and human actions. He saw a constant social and political tension between liberty and authority, and he developed extensive political and economic theories to describe this conflict.
He believed there is an inescapable moral dimension to human life, and it is found in emotions rather than reason. Moral concepts originate from a social perspective, not a personal one; and morality does not require a religious foundation. Hume concluded that we cannot reason about the cause of natural order because we have no experience of that cause. Hume believed that God is a kind of "principle of intelligibility", only remotely resembling the human mind.
In his scientific philosophy, Hume denied that we can isolate objects and understand them outside their context (beyond the influence of other objects). Hume's great discovery was the concept that the mind itself organizes our experience, making objective knowledge impossible. This insight was later expanded by Kant into a broad philosophical revolution, with credit given to Hume.
For Hume, "philosophy is common sense methodized and corrected." Human beings have but two tasks: the theoretical task of discovering how the world really is, and the practical task of making the physical environment serve human purposes.
2 pages, Audio CD
First published October 1, 1975
2 people are currently reading
83 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews
May 25, 2019
As with others in this “The Giants of Philosophy” Audio Classic Series, this nutshell presentation on Hume was excellent.
Hume’s thoughts are contrasted with the long philosophical tradition of theoretical reason, which sought truth from an external, objective realm to direct human behavior. This starts with Plato. His quest for the Good later morphed, for others, into the truths of God, and then into the secularized rationalism of the Enlightenment where good and bad became discoverable by reason alone. Hume was critical of this philosophical approach. We are, he argued, primarily beings of passion, not of theoretical reason, and practical reason exists to serve the passions.
Hume is also critical of the empiricism of Hobbes and Locke, even though they were also critical of theoretical reason. For those two thinkers, philosophy reflected the mechanical world of Newton. Humans were individualized units, “atoms” in motion, driven by the self-preservation impulse, and they bumped into each other as a result. The only thing that kept order was fear and authority (Hobbes) or counter-vailing power (Locke). While Hume believed in checks and balances and that “liberty must be protected by government and the rule of law,” Hume thought Hobbes and Locke went too far. It was too raw and stark. It was also unnecessary he thought, for we are social beings by nature and naturally inclined via sympathy to act in ways that benefit others. This “capacity for humanity” is the essence of Hume’s moral and ethical theory. Our passions include our social nature. There is no gap between what is and what ought to be. Who we are is good, and that’s who we ought to be.
Hume is on solid grounds until he reaches his premise that we are all endowed with benevolent impulses. Many are. Many are not. Darwinian evolution is about variability within the species. We are a species only in a generic, overall sense, but underneath, we are highly variable and there is no single human nature. At one pole are those who promote self-interest regardless of others. When combined with the use of power and manipulation and deceit, this approach works as a survival strategy. Since self-restraint does not happen, external authority is necessary to preserve order, just as Hobbes argued. Some – maybe most – are less extreme and promote their self-interest by cooperating with others for mutual benefit. Here, implicit social contracts are at work to facilitate “reciprocal altruism,” a highly referenced but badly named (there’s nothing altruistic about it) term in evolutionary biology. When combined with institutional checks and balances, this is more in line with Locke’s theory. This also works for evolutionary success. Cooperating for mutual benefit is the essence of group cohesion and it makes for good tribalism. As part of the group, individuals survive. Outside the group, they died. At the other end of the spectrum are those with “fully-evolved” benevolent impulses. They serve others as well as themselves, but not for overt utilitarian purposes. Here the sympathy of Hume does work its magic. Sympathy is the glue that makes the group – family, clan, tribe, nation – cohere. And this too has obvious survival value.
The philosophical naturalism of Hume runs into problems when it focuses on a single human nature. We are highly variable beings, including the ways we promote our self-interest. Interestingly, post-Darwinian evolutionary theorists still see human nature in a unitary way. We are all either self-seekers (Spencer, Dawkins) or we are all love-making Bonobos (deWaal et al). But variability is the stuff that natural selection works on and we should be thinking less in generic species terms and more in terms of the inherent variability within our species that allows for the full spectrum between Hobbes and Hume. We have people on both ends but we are mostly a mixture between the two.
Hume’s thoughts are contrasted with the long philosophical tradition of theoretical reason, which sought truth from an external, objective realm to direct human behavior. This starts with Plato. His quest for the Good later morphed, for others, into the truths of God, and then into the secularized rationalism of the Enlightenment where good and bad became discoverable by reason alone. Hume was critical of this philosophical approach. We are, he argued, primarily beings of passion, not of theoretical reason, and practical reason exists to serve the passions.
Hume is also critical of the empiricism of Hobbes and Locke, even though they were also critical of theoretical reason. For those two thinkers, philosophy reflected the mechanical world of Newton. Humans were individualized units, “atoms” in motion, driven by the self-preservation impulse, and they bumped into each other as a result. The only thing that kept order was fear and authority (Hobbes) or counter-vailing power (Locke). While Hume believed in checks and balances and that “liberty must be protected by government and the rule of law,” Hume thought Hobbes and Locke went too far. It was too raw and stark. It was also unnecessary he thought, for we are social beings by nature and naturally inclined via sympathy to act in ways that benefit others. This “capacity for humanity” is the essence of Hume’s moral and ethical theory. Our passions include our social nature. There is no gap between what is and what ought to be. Who we are is good, and that’s who we ought to be.
Hume is on solid grounds until he reaches his premise that we are all endowed with benevolent impulses. Many are. Many are not. Darwinian evolution is about variability within the species. We are a species only in a generic, overall sense, but underneath, we are highly variable and there is no single human nature. At one pole are those who promote self-interest regardless of others. When combined with the use of power and manipulation and deceit, this approach works as a survival strategy. Since self-restraint does not happen, external authority is necessary to preserve order, just as Hobbes argued. Some – maybe most – are less extreme and promote their self-interest by cooperating with others for mutual benefit. Here, implicit social contracts are at work to facilitate “reciprocal altruism,” a highly referenced but badly named (there’s nothing altruistic about it) term in evolutionary biology. When combined with institutional checks and balances, this is more in line with Locke’s theory. This also works for evolutionary success. Cooperating for mutual benefit is the essence of group cohesion and it makes for good tribalism. As part of the group, individuals survive. Outside the group, they died. At the other end of the spectrum are those with “fully-evolved” benevolent impulses. They serve others as well as themselves, but not for overt utilitarian purposes. Here the sympathy of Hume does work its magic. Sympathy is the glue that makes the group – family, clan, tribe, nation – cohere. And this too has obvious survival value.
The philosophical naturalism of Hume runs into problems when it focuses on a single human nature. We are highly variable beings, including the ways we promote our self-interest. Interestingly, post-Darwinian evolutionary theorists still see human nature in a unitary way. We are all either self-seekers (Spencer, Dawkins) or we are all love-making Bonobos (deWaal et al). But variability is the stuff that natural selection works on and we should be thinking less in generic species terms and more in terms of the inherent variability within our species that allows for the full spectrum between Hobbes and Hume. We have people on both ends but we are mostly a mixture between the two.
March 5, 2020
For someone who knew nothing, it was useful. Philosophy requires more hours I have the intention to spare. So I accept I have to believe what secondary sources say.
December 16, 2019
This is an approximately two-hour journey into the life and time and writings of 18th Century Scottish philosopher David Hume. It's very well narrated by Charlton Heston with comments by other thinkers of the time voiced by actors (or perhaps Heston himself) appropriately so that continental thinkers have German or French accents, and thinkers from England sound English as opposed to the direct quotes from Hume, which are voiced in a Scottish accent. The recounting of Hume's life story was vivid and puts his subsequent work and thoughts into perspective. Although he wasn't conventionally religious he had dedicated his life to learning and writing, eschewing "contemptible" distraction and leading a personally austere life. Life in Scotland could not have been easy in that era, and frugality must have increased chances of survival.
Hume came up with a number of ideas - such as on what is possible to know, what God may represent (he rejected the personified notion of God, although he did attend church every Sunday), his idea that every person has some sort of empathy for others' plight and that this is the source of morality, and many thoughts on political economy as well. I'm not sure it is possible to instantly absorb Hume's ideas by listening to the very interesting narrative, but the audiobook could be an entertaining introduction to what some might see as a rather dry topic. Anyone interested could continue to look into Hume by actually reading some of his works or taking a class on Hume (along with the other 18th C philosophers). This is an excellently produced introduction however - and I would recommend it to anyone interested in finding out about this important philosopher.
Hume came up with a number of ideas - such as on what is possible to know, what God may represent (he rejected the personified notion of God, although he did attend church every Sunday), his idea that every person has some sort of empathy for others' plight and that this is the source of morality, and many thoughts on political economy as well. I'm not sure it is possible to instantly absorb Hume's ideas by listening to the very interesting narrative, but the audiobook could be an entertaining introduction to what some might see as a rather dry topic. Anyone interested could continue to look into Hume by actually reading some of his works or taking a class on Hume (along with the other 18th C philosophers). This is an excellently produced introduction however - and I would recommend it to anyone interested in finding out about this important philosopher.
November 27, 2019
Before reading this book, David Hume by Nicholas Capaldi, if I saw the name I would have said that it sounds familiar...isn't he a journalist with the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times? Now I know I would have been wrong in many ways; not a journalist, doesn't have his own show, and lived entirely in the 18th century. He was a Scottish philosopher and is one of 13 included in the Giants of Philosophy collection. He was a philosopher, historian, economist, and essayist who is especially know for his works on empiricism and skepticism. His ideas were a major influence on later philosophers. He considered philosophy as the inductive, experimental science of human nature and based it on ideas from Sir Isaac Newton and John Locke. His empirical argument against British mercantilism formed a building block for classical economics. He died of abdominal cancer in 1776 at age 65.
A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. - David Hume
A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. - David Hume
May 31, 2010
I acquired this audiobook through Audible.com and found it to be a concise, articulate overview of the highlights of David Hume's philosophical legacy.
Hume is an important figure in empiricism, religion, ethics and influenced the philosophy of future giants, like Kant and Einstein.
The brevity of this edition lends it to repeat listenings, which are helpful when trying to absorb a lot of information from an audiobook.
Hume is an important figure in empiricism, religion, ethics and influenced the philosophy of future giants, like Kant and Einstein.
The brevity of this edition lends it to repeat listenings, which are helpful when trying to absorb a lot of information from an audiobook.
December 3, 2017
Hume challenged the very foundations of cause and effect, especially how they relate to the morality of religion. He also wrote a History of England which was very well regarded by his contemporaries. Hume’s two seminal works on the nature of man and natural religion are regarded as some of the most important in western philosophy.
July 18, 2021
I'm a bit confused at Hume's denouncement of induction. Maybe it has a limited application but surely it's sound within itself.
The most interesting aspect of this was considering the brain to simply be another organ of the body. The concept of 'the mind' is just as romanticized as the soul or the spirit. At this point I doubt the mind exists at all. It's just a framework the brain uses to refer to itself or the conscious part of itself. The part that believes it's holding the steering wheel. Understanding the brain as another organ but one focused on perception and decision making removes much of the ethereal mysticism of 'the mind' and allows a more grounded and humbling perspective of my own personal consciousness.
The most interesting aspect of this was considering the brain to simply be another organ of the body. The concept of 'the mind' is just as romanticized as the soul or the spirit. At this point I doubt the mind exists at all. It's just a framework the brain uses to refer to itself or the conscious part of itself. The part that believes it's holding the steering wheel. Understanding the brain as another organ but one focused on perception and decision making removes much of the ethereal mysticism of 'the mind' and allows a more grounded and humbling perspective of my own personal consciousness.
December 17, 2017
A good introduction to Hume, in whom I became interested after reading that some of his ideas reflect Buddhist thought. Was Hume exposed to Buddhist philosophy? Quite possibly and he thus changed the direction of western philosophy.
August 10, 2019
Not a bad overview of Humes theories. As far as the theories go they are a bit wacky but the info was thorough and the subject matter was informative. 6/10 probably just a one off.
January 1, 2021
Dense and very interesting, and it brings up many relations to modern thought and the historical perspective of Humes's contribution. I will return to this once I've had some time to digest it
September 6, 2021
New ideas….
November 2, 2022
This just does not make it as an audiobook. It’s too intellectually dense and dry. I’m giving up on this series.
January 23, 2023
Hume remains an enigma to me 'til this day. A fascinating enigma at that, I hope to analyze more of his works to decipher his wisdom better. Although this commentary did make me want to read more of his works - from economics, to physics, to history and beyond. I believe he indeed was a polymath, having even influenced Adam Smith with his "Wealth of Nations."
February 27, 2023
A very brief journey into the life of a great man, David Hume!
May 21, 2009
Hated by both loyalists and revolutionaries, disparaged frequently, befriended by economist Adam Smith, and wiser than Descartes and Locke. A precursor to postmodern subjectivity, he thought that we should put the brakes on merely studying the objective, knowing that even the apparently objective is filtered through the human consciousness, therefore coming to the conclusion that it is humanity we should study, not merely what seem to be (but are not, actually) humanity's objective and disengaged surroundings. In this, the Scottish Hume was parallel to the revolution in physics that realized that space is not merely a static field in which solid forms reside, but just as much a part of the party as earth itself.
March 4, 2022
A short and sweet biography of Hume, his philosophy and its significance. I am not a philosopher so I cannot evaluate how well the author has represented Hume, but this seemed like a good summary. It told me the things I wanted to know first, before delving further.
This is an audio book. I'd definitely listen again.
This is an audio book. I'd definitely listen again.
January 20, 2022
A philosophical biography of the 300-pound philosopher. In this book, we get to know Hume's philosophy, his historical, moral, and economic writings, and his acquaintanceship with his friends among whom are Adam Smith and Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
I really love this radio series: It's very easy to swallow, and the narrators who reflect each author's accents give spirit to the whole book.
I really love this radio series: It's very easy to swallow, and the narrators who reflect each author's accents give spirit to the whole book.
December 25, 2014
While people regard Descartes as being the most sceptical philosopher, I personally think that David Hume is the master of skepticism. Hume is one of the figures that greatly influenced my thinking, especially with his skeptical view of causality.
September 10, 2009
Good initial overview of Hume's biography and philosophy. Not enough to sink teeth into the reasons behind the Hume's focus on internal perceptions vs. external absolutes.
August 7, 2014
used audiobook
October 17, 2018
"Generally speaking, the errors in religion are dangerous; those in philosophy only ridiculous." ~ Hume
I read philosophy so I can sense how people thought. I feel its so profound that we have come a long way from the philosophies of the best but never learnt anything about questioning.
I read philosophy so I can sense how people thought. I feel its so profound that we have come a long way from the philosophies of the best but never learnt anything about questioning.
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews