Home > Terms > English, UK (UE) > Hume’s argument against causation

Hume’s argument against causation

How can know that (sensory event) A is the cause of some (sensory event) B? Since A and B are distinguishable, we do not think of one being the cause of the other until, through experience, we find constant conjunction between A and B (coupled with "contiguity" (closeness) of A and B, and the priority of A to B). This constant conjunction gives rise to a superstition that there is a necessary connexion between A and B but this notion is just superstition, in that we might have had a long run of coincidences. Since A and B are separable, and we can conceive them existing apart, there is no purely rational basis for deriving B from A; and appeal to some general principle derived from experience (i.e., the future will be like the past) is not helpful because any such principle suffers from the same problem as "A causes B" -- because this too can be coincidental.

This is auto-generated content. You can help to improve it.
0
Collect to Blossary

Member comments

You have to log in to post to discussions.

Terms in the News

Featured Terms

Harry8L
  • 0

    Terms

  • 0

    Blossaries

  • 1

    Followers

Industry/Domain: People Category: Musicians

Bob Dylan

American singer-songwriter and poet, well known since the 1960s when he became seen as a figurehead of social unrest and change through his songs ...

Contributor

Featured blossaries

English Quotes

Category: Arts   2 1 Terms

World War II Infantry Weapons

Category: History   2 22 Terms