OF THE FIRST PRINCIPLES OF GOVERNMENT . David Hume Rendered into HTML and text by Jon Roland Editing and additional notes based on that of Eugene F. Miller
© 2017 Wine & Dine in the D . ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Created by Russellk Design .
The tone this passage conveys is one of resigned dissatisfaction. Although Hume does the best that can be expected on the subject, he is dissatisfied, but this dissatisfaction is inevitable. This is because, as Hume maintains in Part VII of the Enquiry , a definiens is nothing but an enumeration of the constituent simple ideas in the definiendum. However, Hume has just given us reason to think that we have no such satisfactory constituent ideas, hence the “inconvenience” requiring us to appeal to the “extraneous.” This is not to say that the definitions are incorrect. Note that he still applies the appellation “just” to them despite their appeal to the extraneous, and in the Treatise , he calls them “precise.” Rather, they are unsatisfying. It is an inconvenience that they appeal to something foreign, something we should like to remedy. Unfortunately, such a remedy is impossible, so the definitions, while as precise as they can be, still leave us wanting something further. But if this is right, then Hume should be able to endorse both D1 and D2 as vital components of causation without implying that he endorses either (or both) as necessary and sufficient for causation. For these reasons, Hume’s discussion leading up to the two definitions should be taken as primary in his account of causation rather than the definitions themselves.
Yeah I don't really feel like writing a 3-5 research paper that's due Monday for science fair....
Don't panic, we'll get through this together. Let's explore our options here.
Hamilton believed that “the vigor of government is essential to the security of liberty.” Do you agree? If so, why? If not, why? What do you think he meant by “vigor”?