Wisdom in Education Volume 7 Issue 1 Article 3 5-2017 On David Hume. Tomasz B. Stanek California State University, San Bernardino, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/wie Part of the Social and Philosophical Foundations of Education Commons Recommended Citation Stanek, Tomasz B. (2017) "On David Hume.," Wisdom in Education: Vol. 7 : Iss. 1 , Article 3. Available at: https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/wie/vol7/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by CSUSB ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Wisdom in Education by an authorized editor of CSUSB ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. On David Hume. Abstract After reviewing the (2012) Oxford University Press title: Classic and contemporary readings in the philosophy of education, a common philosophy of education text for undergraduate and graduate students, I was surprised that the influence and the philosophical imprint of David Hume (who awakened Kant) was missing and omitted. David Hume’s ideas were monumentally important not only to Immanuel Kant but also to those who would eventually call educational behaviorism their home. To fill the oid,v I have included my response to the ongoing debates and some of the most intriguing questions regarding Hume’s philosophical stance, his suggestions, and perhaps seeds to those who would build their theories in the nineteenth and twentieth century. My first question for discussion provides a basic attempt at Hume’s position regarding his basic theory of experience-based causes, the second question ponders his ideas on Socratic concept of akrasia, and the final question deals with Hume’s is-ought concept. What is remarkable about Hume’s contribution to the philosophy of education is his stance on the principles of solid experience as a way to perceive reality, constructs, or even the constructivist ideas for linguistics, missing experience, or fallacies. Keywords David Hume, David Hume and Education Author Statement Author, Tomasz Stanek, is a recent (2012) Ed.D graduate from California State University San Bernardino's College of Education, a community college teacher and a scholar interested in a variety of research: from history, migrations and diaspora, and modern conflicts ot education and educational theory. Dr Stanek teaches at Chaffey College and lectures at University of California, Riverside Extension School. This article is available in Wisdom in Education: https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/wie/vol7/iss1/3 Stanek: On David Hume On David Hume Tomasz B. Stanek After reviewing the (2012) Oxford University Press title: Classic and simplification or explanation of this work, contemporary readings in the philosophy of An enquiry concerning human understanding education by Steven M. Cahn, a common (1748) were misunderstood at first but philosophy of education text for the became monumentally constructive for his undergraduate and graduate students, I closest follower, Immanuel Kant. Simply was surprised that the influence and the put, Hume advocated more for what philosophical imprint of David Hume today is known as a psychological basis of (who awakened Kant) was missing and human nature and experience-based omitted. David Hume’s ideas were learning or experience-based knowledge. monumentally important, not only to He argued that reason alone cannot Immanuel Kant, but also to those who possibly be responsible for human would eventually call educational knowledge, however it is complementary behaviorism their home. and assists inductive reasoning and To fill the void, I have included my causality. Hume is regarded as one of the response to the ongoing debates and some most influential philosophers of Western of the most intriguing questions regarding philosophy. The essay below reflects the Hume’s philosophical stance, his Humean wisdom and his perceptions of suggestions, and perhaps seeds for those the observable world, and is intended to who would build on their theories in the provoke thoughts, critiques, and nineteenth and twentieth century. comparisons to those who conduct Although David Hume did not write any research in the field of education and specific chapter on education, his unique human wisdom. approach to human learning makes his I shall organize this account around the philosophy very valuable today. His asking of three questions. The first insights cannot be ignored, just as we question for the discussion provides a cannot ignore Charles Darwin for his basic attempt at Hume’s position ‘missing’ notes on pedagogy. What is regarding his basic theory of experience- remarkable about Hume’s contribution to based causes. The second question the philosophy of education is his stance ponders his ideas on the Socratic concept on the principles of solid experience as a of akrasia. The final question deals with way to perceive reality, Hume’s is-ought concept. Each constructs, or even the constructivist ideas philosophical analysis of a particular for linguistics, missing experience, or question is followed by its applicability to fallacies. the field of education. David Hume is known for his radical system of philosophical empiricism, Question 1 skepticism, and naturalism. His stance on the existence of the innate ideas led him Hume offers two definitions of cause, to the basic assumption that all human as a philosophical relation and as a natural knowledge is ultimately founded in relation. What are we to make of these experience and mainly through causation. two senses of cause — is Hume a realist, Some of his most influential publications, anti-realist, subjectivist, or objectivist? namely, A treatise of human nature (1739) Hume describes two causal processes, and the consequent one that occurs in the outside world, and Published by CSUSB ScholarWorks, 2017 1 Wisdom in Education, Vol. 7 [2017], Iss. 1, Art. 3 the other in our minds. To support this, Hume dissatisfied with just “one Hume provided two definitions of definition” of causation? This is a very causation, which lay at the heart of his important interpretive question for at least philosophical foundation, and represented two reasons. First, I cannot reject him as a different view of the same object or anti-realist by virtue of his first definition relation. The association in this relation of cause. Second, I cannot ignore Hume’s should be understood as either a claims to the necessity of the second philosophical or natural one. For clarity definition and all that it represents: a in this paper, I will simply label the central element of his philosophy of definitions as A, and B respectively. The human learning. first definition (A) of cause was defined by Can Hume be truly defined by the Hume as, “An object precedent and definitions of what is considered today to contiguous to another, and where all the be a realist, anti-realist, constructivist or objects resembling the former are placed objectivist? For the purpose of this short in like relations of precedency and paper, I will test the following widely contiguity to those objects, that resemble understood definitions. According to the latter” (Norton et al., p. 114). The Stanford’s Philosophical Encyclopedia second definition (B) defined cause as, (SPE), a realist, - in a metaphysical sense, is “An object precedent and contiguous to “one who wishes to claim that apart from another, and so united with it, that the the mundane sort of empirical idea of the one determines the mind to dependence of objects and their form the idea of the other, and the properties familiar to us from everyday impression of the one to form a more life, there is no further philosophically lively idea of the other” (Norton et al., p. interesting sense, in which everyday 114). objects and their properties can be said to I believe that Hume supplied two be dependent on anyone's linguistic distinctive definitions of an experimental practices or conceptual schemes”(SPE). method in his own quest to understand By the opposite supposition the anti-realist reality and how that reality was related to rejects realism. A subjectivist doctrine human learning. He has (A) eliminated, points to “knowledge as merely subjective and at the same time, (B) introduced and that there is no external or objective human bias (or individual perception), by truth”(SPE). Therefore, “Our own which the causation could be observed by mental activity is the only unquestionable one definition (A), yet it could not be fact of our experience”(SPE). According realistically assessed by definition (B), to the Internet Encyclopedia of partly since our own imagination may Philosophy (IEP), the term “subjective” have created such causation. typically indicates the possibility of error. Hume’s fascination with causation as An objectivist, as in reference to objective the basic foundation of his philosophy of knowledge, may simply refer to human understanding, perhaps led him to knowledge of an objective reality by the draw some basic conclusions: (A) perceiving mind. Although this causation occurs as it happens in nature distinction between the objective and (observable or not) and (B) causation subjective reality may create a discrepancy exists as it is observed by the human as illustrated by Locke’s example of the mind. What is perplexing here is the icy and hot water hand experiment. notion that (A) could not be observed if The above (IEP) definitions attempt to (B) did not come to being and, therefore, define Hume’s understanding of how causation may not exist at all. Why was human minds perceive causation between https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/wie/vol7/iss1/3 2 Stanek: On David Hume ideas; simple or complex, and how culturally constructed. Not only it is a humans arrive to observe, through holistic experience but one that is heavily experience, the causes and effects and vice influenced by the individual emotions. versa. Hume clearly stated that the first Hume seems to reason from factual definition may identify a relation not evidence derived from nature, according observable or clearly understood to to his two definitions of cause.