Hume's Concept of the Self

Summary

This script explores David Hume's concept of the self, contrasting it with the views of Plato, Aristotle, and Descartes. Hume argues that the self is an illusion, as we cannot concretely experience or have an impression of such an entity. He critiques the idea of the self as an unchanging substance, suggesting that our mental states are merely a collection of impressions linked by the laws of association: resemblance, contiguity, and cause and effect. Hume's empiricism emphasizes that knowledge of matters of fact comes solely from experience, and our understanding of cause and effect is based on habit rather than a priori reasoning. This perspective challenges the traditional metaphysical view of an enduring self.

Takeaways

• 🧠 Hume's concept of the self is a radical departure from traditional philosophers like Descartes, Plato, and Aristotle who believed in an unchanging 'self' or 'soul'.
• 💭 For Hume, the 'self' is an illusion because we cannot have an impression of it, suggesting that discussions of the self by other philosophers are merely semantic.
• 🌟 Hume's theory of ideas posits that all ideas come from either sensation or reflection, which he terms 'impressions'.
• 🔗 Hume's laws of association (resemblance, contiguity, and cause/effect) link our ideas to form a coherent whole.
• 🤔 Hume emphasizes that ideas not representing real experiences are abstract and meaningless, challenging the concept of an unchanging self.
• 🔍 Perception and reason are the faculties through which we understand impressions and propositions, respectively, according to Hume.
• 📊 Propositions about relations of ideas can be known intuitively or demonstratively, without empirical evidence.
• 🍬 Matters of fact, however, require empirical evidence to establish their truth, such as tasting sugar to know it's sweet.
• 🔄 Hume is an empiricist, asserting that our knowledge of facts comes from sensory experience and memory.
• ❓ Central to Hume's theory of knowledge is the question of how we extend our knowledge beyond immediate sensory experience.
• 🔄 Our understanding of cause and effect is not先天的 but based on habitual experience, which Hume sees as the basis for our predictions about reality.

Q & A

What is the main difference between Hume's concept of the self and that of philosophers like Descartes, Plato, and Aristotle?

Hume's concept of the self differs significantly as he argues that there is no such thing as a self. Unlike Descartes, Plato, and Aristotle who believed in an unchanging substance or soul that persists through time, Hume sees the self as an illusion, a concept without a concrete impression or experience.

What does Hume mean when he says that the soul, mind, or self is one of those meaningless words?

Hume suggests that because we do not have an impression of the self as a substance, the terms soul, mind, or self are abstract and without concrete meaning. They are words we use without a clear understanding of what they represent, making them meaningless in the philosophical discussion of the self.

How does Hume's theory of ideas relate to his concept of the self?

Hume's theory of ideas, which states that all ideas come from impressions through sensation or reflection, is central to his concept of the self. Since we do not have an impression of a self as a substance, Hume concludes that the idea of the self is not a real entity but a mental construct.

What are the three laws of association according to Hume?

Hume's three laws of association are resemblance, contiguity in time or place, and cause and effect. These laws explain how our mind links different ideas together to form coherent thoughts and understanding.

How does Hume's view on the law of cause and effect differ from that of rationalists?

Hume argues that our knowledge of cause and effect comes entirely from experience, not from a priori reasoning as rationalists believe. He rejects the idea of a necessary connection between cause and effect, suggesting that such connections are perceived through habit or custom, not through reason.

What role does perception play in Hume's theory of knowledge?

In Hume's theory of knowledge, perception provides the raw data of experience. It is through the faculty of perception that we receive impressions or ideas, which are then processed by the faculty of reason to form our understanding of the world.

How does Hume define propositions in his theory of knowledge?

Hume defines propositions as either a priori statements about relations of ideas or empirical statements about matters of fact and real existence. Relations of ideas can be known intuitively or demonstratively, while matters of fact require empirical evidence.

What does Hume mean when he says we are just a bunch of impressions?

Hume suggests that instead of an unchanging self or substance, we are a collection of fleeting impressions and experiences. There is no underlying, constant self; rather, our sense of self is a product of our continuous stream of perceptions and thoughts.

How does Hume's concept of the self challenge traditional metaphysical views?

Hume's concept of the self challenges traditional metaphysical views by denying the existence of an unchanging, independent substance or soul. He argues that the self is not a metaphysical entity but a psychological construct based on our experiences and habits.

What is the role of experience in Hume's theory of the self?

Experience is crucial in Hume's theory of the self as it is the basis for all our ideas, including the idea of the self. According to Hume, since we do not have a direct experience of the self as a substance, the concept of the self is not grounded in empirical reality but is a product of our mental associations.

Outlines

00:00

🤔 Hume's Skeptical View on the Self

This paragraph discusses the philosophical divergence of David Hume's concept of the self from those of Descartes, Plato, and Aristotle. Hume argues that the notion of a self is an illusion, as there is no empirical evidence or impression of a self as a continuous substance. Traditionally, philosophers like Plato and Aristotle used the term 'soul', and Descartes used 'mind', to describe an unchanging essence that persists through time, housing all mental states. In contrast, Hume asserts that we cannot have an impression of such an entity, rendering terms like 'soul', 'mind', or 'self' meaningless. He critiques the idea that these philosophers are merely debating semantics without concrete experience of the self. Hume's theory of ideas, influenced by John Locke, posits that ideas originate from impressions (sensation and reflection) and are meaningless if they don't correspond to real experiences. He introduces the laws of association—resemblance, contiguity, and cause and effect—as the basis for how ideas form a coherent whole in our minds.

05:01

🔍 Hume's Theory of Ideas and Causality

The second paragraph delves deeper into Hume's theory of ideas, emphasizing the law of cause and effect as a cornerstone of his philosophy. Hume distinguishes between two types of propositions: a priori statements about relations of ideas, which can be known intuitively or demonstratively without empirical evidence, and empirical statements about matters of fact and real existence, which require experience. He challenges the rationalist view that the cause and effect relationship is based on a priori reasoning, arguing instead that our understanding of causality is derived solely from experience. Hume contends that what we perceive as a necessary connection between cause and effect is actually a product of habit or custom, not reason. This perspective leads to his broader epistemological inquiry into how we can be certain of the existence of facts in reality, beyond what our senses and memory directly provide.

10:02

🧠 The Illusion of the Self in Hume's Philosophy

In the final paragraph, the concept of the self is revisited through the lens of Hume's theory of ideas. Hume's skepticism extends to the self, as he argues that introspection does not reveal any impression or idea of a self as a substance. He suggests that the idea of the self is a natural but inevitable fiction, arising from our existence and accustomed thinking. Hume likens the self to a bundle of impressions rather than an unchanging substance, asserting that the belief in a self is a supposition without empirical support. He concludes that while it is natural to discuss the self due to our existence and habits, the notion of an unchanging self is an illusion. This aligns with his broader skepticism towards metaphysical concepts that lack empirical grounding.

Keywords

💡Self

In the video, the concept of the 'self' is central to Hume's philosophical argument. Unlike philosophers such as Descartes, Plato, and Aristotle, who see the self as an unchanging substance, Hume views the self as an illusion. He argues that there is no consistent impression of the self, and thus, no reason to believe in its existence as a stable entity. For Hume, the self is simply a collection of perceptions and impressions.

💡Substance

The term 'substance' is used to describe something that exists independently and remains the same over time. Philosophers like Descartes, Plato, and Aristotle considered the soul or mind as a substance, which supports the existence of a consistent self. However, Hume challenges this view, asserting that the idea of a substance is not supported by any concrete impression or experience, making it a meaningless concept.

💡Impression

Hume uses the term 'impression' to refer to the immediate experiences of sensation and reflection. These impressions are the foundation of all ideas in Hume's theory of knowledge. According to Hume, the self cannot be an impression because we have no direct sensory or reflective experience of it. Thus, the self, as a substance, does not exist in Hume's view.

💡Empiricism

Empiricism, as presented by Hume, is the philosophical theory that all knowledge is derived from sensory experience. In contrast to rationalism, which claims knowledge can be gained through reason alone, Hume argues that all knowledge about matters of fact must be based on experience. This principle underpins Hume's rejection of the self as an abstract concept without empirical evidence.

💡Cause and Effect

For Hume, the relationship between cause and effect is based on habit or custom, not a necessary connection as claimed by rationalists. We come to expect certain outcomes (like rain making the road wet) because we have experienced them repeatedly, but there is no inherent logical connection between these events. This principle is a major part of Hume’s argument against metaphysical reasoning about the self and other abstract concepts.

💡Association of Ideas

Hume's theory of the association of ideas explains how different ideas become connected in the mind. He identifies three laws of association: resemblance, contiguity in time and place, and cause and effect. These laws explain how the mind links separate impressions into coherent thoughts. For example, thinking about honey might bring up the ideas of sweetness and liquid. This association process is how Hume argues we form the concept of the self, but he sees it as a fiction, a bundle of impressions without any real substance.

💡Rationalism

Rationalism is the philosophical position that knowledge can be gained through reason and intellectual deduction without necessarily relying on sensory experience. Rationalists believe in the existence of necessary connections, such as the connection between cause and effect. Hume challenges rationalism by asserting that our knowledge of cause and effect, and other matters of fact, comes only from experience, not from reason.

💡A Priori Reasoning

A priori reasoning refers to knowledge that can be known independently of experience, purely through logical deduction or intuition. Hume contrasts this with empirical knowledge, which requires sensory experience. He argues that a priori reasoning cannot establish facts about the world, particularly about cause and effect, and therefore cannot support metaphysical concepts like the self.

💡Matters of Fact

For Hume, 'matters of fact' are propositions whose truth can only be determined through sensory experience. For example, the proposition that 'sugar is sweet' is a matter of fact because one must experience the taste of sugar to verify its sweetness. This is contrasted with 'relations of ideas,' which can be known a priori. Hume’s focus on matters of fact emphasizes his empiricist approach and his belief that ideas like the self cannot be known because they are not based on experience.

💡Relations of Ideas

Hume distinguishes between 'relations of ideas' and 'matters of fact.' Relations of ideas are propositions that can be known a priori, such as mathematical truths or logical deductions (e.g., 'all triangles have three sides'). These are necessarily true and do not require empirical evidence. Hume argues that discussions about the self often rely on relations of ideas, but since the self is not an empirical concept, its existence cannot be established in this way.

Highlights

Hume's concept of the self runs counter to philosophers like Descartes, Plato, and Aristotle, as he argues that the self is an illusion.

Plato, Aristotle, and Descartes believed that the soul or mind is a substance that remains the same through time, but Hume disagrees.

Hume contends that if the self were a substance, we should have an impression of it, yet we do not, making the concept of the self meaningless.

Hume criticizes philosophers like Plato, Aristotle, and Descartes for arguing about words without having any concrete experience of the soul, mind, or self.

According to Hume, the idea of the self is a mere fiction, similar to the abstract idea of a unicorn, which does not exist in reality.

Hume's theory of ideas asserts that impressions, which are both sensations and reflections, are the basis for all knowledge.

Ideas that do not represent something real are considered abstract and meaningless, according to Hume.

Hume describes three laws of association: resemblance, contiguity in time or place, and cause and effect, with emphasis on the third.

The law of cause and effect is central to Hume’s theory of knowledge and helps explain human understanding of reality.

For Hume, knowledge of cause and effect comes entirely from experience, not from reasoning a priori, as the rationalists claim.

The idea of a necessary connection between cause and effect is a product of habit and custom, not reason, according to Hume.

For Hume, the only valid evidence of real existence comes from sensory experiences, memory, and empirical observations.

Hume's theory of knowledge challenges the rationalist idea of a priori reasoning, emphasizing experience as the basis of understanding.

Hume famously concludes that we are merely a 'bundle of impressions' rather than possessing a stable, unchanging self.

While the idea of the self feels natural and inevitable to us, Hume argues that it is merely a fiction created by our perceptions and habits.

Transcripts

hume's concept

of the self

hume's concept of the self does not only

differ

but runs counter to descartes and the

other philosophers of the self

such as plato and aristotle

this is because for you there is

no such thing as a self

let me briefly explain why for hume the

concept of the self

is an illusion

first we need to clarify the term soul

that plato and aristotle used and mind

that descartes used for plato

aristotle descartes and other

philosophers who engaged in this

issue the term soul or mind

refers to a thing or substance which is

supposed to be

invariably the same through time

so these philosophers understood the

soul as

a substance and as we may already know

a substance is understood in traditional

metaphysics

as anything material or immaterial

whose existence is independent on

anything else

so for these thinkers the soul

or mind is the seat for all our mental

states

such as thinking analyzing imagining

and the like this means that

the i that is the self is the same

all throughout one's lifetime

one may change physically or emotionally

but the i or self remains

the same now for you

if we possess this substance then we

must have an

impression of it however

for you we do not and cannot have an

impression of such idea

for hume therefore the term soul

mind or self is one of those meaningless

words that we utter

so for you plato aristotle descartes and

the rest of the philosophers of the self

we're arguing only about words

simply because neither of them knows

exactly what a soul

mind or self is they don't experience it

concretely in the first place according

to you

but how did you arrive at the idea that

there

is no such thing as the idea of the self

let us now turn to hume's theory of

ideas

first we have to remember that hume

neither affirms nor denies

the idea of the self it's just that for

you

talking about it simply doesn't make

sense

the reason behind hume's claim that

there is no such thing as the idea of

the self can be gleaned from his theory

of ideas

so on hume's theory of ideas

as john locke argues ideas come from

sensation and reflection

hume calls it impression

hence it must be noted that when you use

the term impression

he means idea when we say impression in

hume

this includes both sensation and

reflection

in luck and for hume

we can have an idea that is an

impression of

something if we experience it concretely

for this reason hume argues that

ideas that do not represent something in

reality

is an abstract idea and therefore

meaningless the idea of a unicorn is an

example of an abstract idea

because in the first place there is no

unicorn in reality

for you there is a multiplicity of

ideas yet all these ideas

are linked together that form a coherent

whole

according to hume this is made possible

by the laws of association

according to hume there are three laws

of association

that is first resemblance second

contiguity in time or place and

third cause and effect

hume says that in the law of resemblance

the idea of one object tends to call to

mind

ideas of resembling objects

for instance the idea of honey resembles

the ideas of

sweet and liquid

in the law of contiguity in time and

place

hume says that when we think of

thunder for instance we tend to think of

lightning

or rain

in the law of cause and effect hume says

that

when we think of for instance the idea

of

a fresh egg falling to the ground

it calls to mind the idea of splattered

mess

please note that hume puts more emphasis

on the third law of

cause and effect as a matter of fact

the law of cause and effect is one of

the most important concepts in hume's

theory of ideas

this explains why after talking about

the law of cause and effect

hume proceeds to the discussion on

perception

and reasoning

according to yume human understanding

is furnished with a faculty of

perception and the faculty of

reason on the one hand

the object of perception are impressions

or ideas and on the other hand

the object of reason are propositions

according to yume propositions are

either

a priori statements about relations of

ideas

or empirical statements about matters of

fact

and real existence

for you relations of ideas can be known

intuitively

or demonstratively

for example the proposition all

triangles have three

angles is an example of a proposition

that can be known intuitively

the proposition the sum total of all

three angles in a right triangle is

equal

to 180 degrees is an example of a

proposition

that can be known demonstratively

it is important to note that in

relations of ideas

the truth can be established without

empirical evidence

in fact in both examples we don't need

to resort to experience

before we can truly say that all

triangles have three angles

or indeed the sum total of all three

angles in a right triangle

is equal to 180 degrees

through mental processes alone we can

truly say

that indeed the propositions are

absolutely true

matters of fact for you are propositions

whose truth can be discovered through

experience alone

take for example the proposition sugar

is

sweet obviously one cannot really say

that indeed sugar is sweet if one has

not tasted it

hence we can never come to know that

sugar is sweet without resorting to

experience

it must be noted that it is matters of

fact that concerns hume

in fact hume's theory of knowledge

centers on the idea of

matters of fat hume

asks what is the nature of the empirical

evidence

which assures us of any real existence

of matters of fact

according to you we are assured of some

facts by the present testimony of our

senses

or by the records of our memory

in other words for you we know that

facts exist in reality simply because

we experience them this explains

why hume was an empiricist

but the question is by what means

do we get beyond such facts in other

words

how can we be sure that such facts exist

in reality

this is the central question in hume's

theory of knowledge

which he developed in his famous work

inquiry concerning human understanding

so again by what means do we get

beyond such facts

according to hume it is by means of the

relation

of cause and effect that we are enabled

to make

more or less reasonable predictions and

conjectures

that go beyond the data of perception

and memory

but how do we arrive at the knowledge of

cause and effect

the answer for you is not reasoning a

priori

as the rationalists would have us

believe but

entirely from experience

again for you our knowledge of the cause

and effect relation

remains limited to experience

of course the mind steps beyond

experience

and engage in reasoning but for you

this kind of reasoning is not supported

by any argument or process of

understanding

through relations of ideas or through

reasoning

a priori this kind of reasoning

for you is supported by habit

or custom

now it must be noted that for the

rationalists

cause and effect relation falls under a

priority reasoning

in other words for the rationalists

there is

a necessary connection between cause and

effect

for example if it is raining at the

moment

then reason tells us that the road must

be wet

however for you in reality

there is no necessary connection between

the two events

between cause and effect

the idea of a necessary connection is

produced in the mind

not through reason a priori but through

habit or custom

hence hume did not reject the idea of

connection whole

sale he only rejects the idea of

connection

employed in metaphysical reasoning that

is

the a priori reasoning in rationalism

again for you there is connection

only through experience which is based

on habit

hence the only evidence assuring us of

any real

existence and matters of fact is

experience that is the present testimony

of our senses

the records of our memory and the causal

reasoning

based on the empirically observed

irregularities of past

experience

now let's go back to hume's concept of

the self and apply what we have learned

from his theory of ideas

for you if we look inside ourselves

we cannot find an impression that is

an idea of a self as a substance

in other words we cannot experience

the self concretely hence for you

we have no reason to suppose that we

are selves or mind or souls

as hume famously says we are just

a bunch of impressions

this means that like the idea of an

ultimate or necessary cause

the idea of self is natural and

inevitable we are inclined to

think about the self because we exist

because we are accustomed to it

however for you like the idea of an

ultimate and necessary cause

the idea of a self is a mere

fiction again

the idea of the self is anything but a

bundle of impressions

or in other words the idea of the self

is just a supposition

indeed for you the idea of the self

is simply an idea and there is no

guarantee that it exists in reality

again it is natural to talk about it

because we exist

because we are accustomed to it but to

suppose that there

is within us an unchanging substance

called the self

is an illusion at least for you

you