Hume believed that individual beliefs contributed to the definition of human beings living in different societies. He thought that those bearing different opinions should be respected if they respected those of those in opposition. The skeptical philosopher had to learn how to approach readers through vibrant writing and improve communicating with them in his own attempt to live a good life. He was scholarly and progressive and determined that modern approaches to philosophy were likely to share knowledge with more people only if they succeeded in adjusting to the demands of the time.
Hume’s first book expounded his teachings on human nature and spoke on the decisions people rationally made based on their convictions. Benevolence, patience, and open-mindedness could, therefore, be successfully taught to people to change beliefs. Arguments based on logic and facts could after that be shared in a compelling manner, regardless of differences such as religion, cultural norms and societal expectations. He argued practically and decently, understanding that people do the best they can to have rational thoughts, though they do not always succeed in being sympathetic or having genuine concerns about the wellbeing of others.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
This worldly scholar was well traveled and was both intellectual and civilized in his way. In comparison to Kant, he was compelled to find the determinants of a good life based on the available level of education that could foster all the virtues considered morally acceptable at the time. Kant worked through a German approach towards knowledge, which he categorized as synthetic apriori expertise and was the basis of philosophy. There were distinctions between every day or practical education, which could be perceived through senses. The other form of knowledge was apriori knowledge or truths which were justified by reality. For example, he used mathematics to give universal truths that contingently remain true regardless of where a person was in the known universe. His explanations demanded that knowledge was in some way comprehensive and other ways globally acceptable due to the uniformity of senses owned by all. The German philosopher gave examples as to how analytical concepts could be explicitly examined and then joined with other thoughts and related to each other to form judgments. Empirical or scientific information supports the development of modern-day ideas that are known in metaphysics.
Lucid beliefs bring together the two philosopher’s views on knowledge and the declarations that we make today, knowingly or not knowingly making assertions based on their opinions taught by Kant and Hume. The background information derived from both philosophers and reality which corresponds to the truth that one knows. Support for these beliefs through the premises can be believed if testimony on the same is a reliable source of information. Philosophers such as Edmund Gettier also contribute to the lessons of knowledge, expounding on false and true beliefs (Gettier, 1963). As Hume asserts that acceptability is highly dependent on a range of variables, Kant is convinced that reason was paramount to all aspects of the subject in discussion.
Kant was a champion of morality and moral truths, just like Hume but the importance of prudence was crucial to him. Categorical imperatives exhibit that the obligations that needed to be followed show the extent to which individuals were rational. One of the ways he used to illustrate the aspects of reason included the evaluation of maxims or general rules, also known as universalizing acts. Kant shared one lesson through the introduction of proverbs: one cannot do things to suit themselves alone without considering the implications of the actions. The revolution is therefore made possible through understanding that objects do not determine the whole; instead, the whole is the determinant of the nature of the object.
Hume valued thought as the operation that would change the relation of ideas and whether or not they were right (Hume, 1985). He introduced matters of fact, which were both conceivable and inconceivable, based on the claims and their contradictory nature. A situation bearing contrast was therefore not wholly impossible and as similar to Kant’s assertions on a priori and a posteriori in that the methods of acquiring information could be obtained through experience or belief from credible information hubs. Immanuel Kant and David Hume shared ideas such as the experiences and conditions that were related to their categories.
However, it was Kant who attempted to process continental rationalism. Regardless of claims that Immanuel renovated the philosophy by opening up an alternative channel in the synthesis of the continental rationalism and the British empiricism, he remained in the approach of or within consciousness and using self-reflection also referred to as the activity of introspection. In other words, that approach as used by Kant always took was, whether it was the dogmatic-pre-critical period or the critical period alike, the method of consciousness which overwhelms the history of contemporary philosophy since Descartes even to the philosophers of modernity such as Husserl and Heidegger.
References
Fogelin, R. J. (1985). Hume's skepticism in the treatise of human nature.
Gettier, E. L. (1963). Is justified true belief knowledge?. analysis , 23 (6), 121-123.
Kant, I. (1998). Critique of pure reason . Cambridge University Press.
Kuklick, B. (1984). Seven Thinkers and How They Grew: Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz; Locke, Berkeley, Hume; Kant (pp. 125-140). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
