Life and Works
Born in Edinburgh, Hume spent his childhood at Ninewells, the family's
modest estate on the Whitadder River in the border lowlands near Berwick.
His father died just after David's second birthday, "leaving me, with
an elder brother and a sister under the care of our Mother, a woman of singular
Merit, who, though young and handsome, devoted herself to the rearing and
educating of her Children." (All quotations in this section from Hume's
autobiographical essay, "My Own life".)
Katherine Falconer
Home realized that young David was "uncommonly wake-minded" -- precocious,
in her lowland dialect -- so when his brother went up to Edinburgh University,
David, not yet twelve, joined him. He studied mathematics and contemporary
science, and read widely in history, literature, and ancient and modern philosophy.
Hume's family
thought him suited for a career in the law, but he preferred reading classical
authors, especially Cicero, whose Offices became his secular substitute
for The Whole Duty of Man and his family's strict Calvinism. Pursuing
the goal of becoming "a Scholar & Philosopher," he followed
a rigorous program of reading and reflection for three years until "there
seem'd to be open'd up to me a New Scene of Thought."
The intensity
of developing this philosophical vision precipitated a psychological crisis
in the isolated scholar. Believing that "a more active scene of life"
might improve his condition, Hume made "a very feeble trial" in
the world of commerce, as a clerk for a Bristol sugar importer. The crisis
passed and he remained intent on articulating his "new scene of thought."
He moved to France, where he could live frugally, and settled in La Flèche,
a sleepy village in Anjou best known for its Jesuit college. Here, where Descartes
and Mersenne studied a century before, Hume read French and other continental
authors, especially Malebranche, Dubos, and Bayle; he occasionally baited
the Jesuits with iconoclastic arguments; and, between 1734 and 1737, he drafted
A Treatise of Human Nature.
Hume returned
to England in 1737 to ready his Treatise for the press. To curry
favor with Bishop Butler, he "castrated" his manuscript, deleting
his controversial discussion of miracles, along with other "nobler parts."
Book I (Of the Understanding) and Book II (Of the Passions)
was published anonymously in 1739. Book III (Of Morals) appeared
in 1740, as well as an anonymous Abstract of the first two books
of the Treatise. Although other candidates, especially Adam Smith,
have occasionally been proposed as the Abstract's author, scholars
now agree that it is Hume's work. The Abstract features a clear,
succinct account of "one simple argument" concerning causation and
the formation of belief. Hume's elegant summary presages his "recasting"
of that argument in the first Enquiry.
The Treatise
was no literary sensation but it didn't "fall dead-born from the press,"
as Hume disappointedly described its reception. Despite his surgical deletions,
the Treatise attracted enough of a "murmour among the zealots"
to fuel his life-long reputation as an atheist and a sceptic.
Back at Ninewells,
Hume published two modestly successful volumes of Essays, Moral and Political
in 1741 and 1742. When the Chair of Ethics and Pneumatical ("Mental")
Philosophy at Edinburgh became vacant in 1745, Hume hoped to fill it, but
his reputation provoked vocal and ultimately successful opposition. Six years
later, he stood for the Chair of Logic at Glasgow, only to be turned down
again. Hume never held an academic post.
In the wake of
the Edinburgh debacle, Hume made the unfortunate decision to accept a position
as tutor to the Marquess of Annandale, only to find that the young Marquess
was insane and his estate manager dishonest. Hume managed to extricate himself
from this situation, and accepted the invitation of his cousin, Lieutenant-General
James St. Clair, to be his Secretary ("I wore the uniform of an officer.")
on a military expedition against the French in Quebec. Contrary winds delayed
St. Clair's fleet until the Ministry canceled the plan, only to spawn a new
expedition that ended as an abortive raid on the coastal town of L'Orient
in Brittany.
Hume also accompanied
St. Clair on an extended diplomatic mission to Vienna and Turin in 1748. While
he was in Italy, the Philosophical Essays concerning Human Understanding
appeared. A recasting of the central ideas of Book I of the Treatise,
the Philosophical Essays were read and reprinted, eventually becoming
part of Hume's Essays and Treatises under the title by which they
are known today, An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding. In 1751,
this Enquiry was joined by a second, An Enquiry concerning the
Principles of Morals. Hume described the second Enquiry, a substantially
rewritten version of Book III of the Treatise, as "incomparably
the best" of all his works. More essays, the Political Discourses,
appeared in 1752, and Hume's correspondence also reveals that a draft of the
Dialogues concerning Natural Religion was underway at this time.
An offer to serve
as Librarian to the Edinburgh Faculty of Advocates gave Hume the opportunity
to work steadily on another project, a History of England, which
was published in six volumes in 1754, 1756, 1759, and 1762. His History
became a best-seller, finally giving him the financial independence he had
long sought.
But even as a
librarian, Hume managed to arouse the ire of the "zealots." In 1754,
his order for several "indecent Books unworthy of a place in a learned
Library" prompted a move for his dismissal, and in 1756, an unsuccessful
attempt to excommunicate him. The Library's Trustees canceled his order for
the offending volumes, which Hume regarded as a personal insult. Since he
needed the Library's resources for his History, Hume did not resign
his post; he did turn over his salary to Thomas Blacklock, a blind poet he
befriended and sponsored. When research for the History was done
in 1757, Hume quickly resigned to make the position available for Adam Ferguson.
Hume's publication
of Four Dissertations (1757) was also surrounded by controversy.
In 1755, he was ready to publish a volume that included "Of Suicide"
and "Of the Immortality of the Soul." He suppressed the controversial
essays when his publisher, Andrew Millar, was threatened with legal action,
due largely to the machinations of the minor theologian William Warburton.
Hume added "Of Tragedy" and "Of the Standard of Taste"
to round out the volume, which also included The Natural History of Religion
and A Dissertation on the Passions.
In 1763, Hume
accepted an invitation from Lord Hertford, the Ambassador to France, to serve
as his Private Secretary. During his three years in Paris, Hume became Secretary
to the Embassy and eventually its Chargè d'Affaires. He also become the rage
of the Parisian salons, enjoying the conversation and company of Diderot,
D'Alembert, and d'Holbach, as well as the attentions and affections of the
salonnières, especially the Comtesse de Boufflers.
Hume returned
to England in 1766, accompanied by Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who was then fleeing
persecution in Switzerland. Their friendship ended quickly and miserably when
the paranoid Rousseau became convinced that Hume was masterminding an international
conspiracy against him.
After a year
(1767-68) as an Under-Secretary of State, Hume returned to Edinburgh to stay.
His autumnal years were spent quietly and comfortably, dining and conversing
with friends, and revising his works for new editions of his Essays and
Treatises, which contained his collected essays, the two Enquiries,
A Dissertation on the Passions, and The Natural History of Religion.
In 1775, he added an "Advertisement" to these volumes, in which
he appeared to disavow the Treatise. Though he regarded this note
as "a compleat Answer" to his critics, especially "Dr. Reid
and that biggotted, silly fellow, Beattie," subsequent readers have wisely
chosen to ignore Hume's admonition to ignore his greatest philosophical work.
Upon finding
that he had intestinal cancer, Hume prepared for his death with the same peaceful
cheer that characterized his life. He arranged for the posthumous publication
of his most controversial work, the Dialogues concerning Natural Religion;
it was seen through the press by his nephew and namesake in 1779, three years
after his uncle's death
Hume's Published Writings
1) A Treatise of Human Nature: Being an Attempt to Introduce the Experimental
Method of Reasoning into Moral Subjects (1739-40).
Notes: in three volumes, published anonymously: Vol. I. Of
the Understanding; Vol. II. Of the Passions.
Vol. III. Of Morals. The work did not sell well,
and no subsequent edition of the Treatise appeared until the early 19th century.
This is Hume's principle philosophical work, the central notions of which
were rewritten more popularly in Philosophical Essays Concerning Human
Understanding (1748) and An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals
(1751).
(2) An Abstract of a Book lately Published; entitled,
A Treatise of Human Nature, &c. Wherein the chief Argument of that
Book is farther Illustrated and Explained (1740).
Notes: 16 page pamphlet, published anonymously as
an effort to bring attention to the Treatise. No subsequent edition
of this appeared until 1938.
(3) Essays, Moral and Political (1741-1742).
Notes: published anonymously in two volumes, in 1741 and 1742 respectively.
In subsequent editions some essays were dropped and others added; the collection
was eventually combined with his Political Discourses (1752) and retitled Essays, Moral, Political and Literary in Hume's collection
of philosophical works, Essays and Treatises on Several Subjects (1753).
(4) A Letter from a Gentleman to his Friend in Edinburgh: Containing Some
Observations on a Specimen of the Principles concerning Religion and Morality,
said to be maintained in a Book lately published, intituled,
A Treatise of Human Nature, &c (1745)
Notes: 34 page pamphlet published anonymously surrounding Hume's candidacy
for candidate for the Chair of Moral Philosophy at the University of Edinburgh.
The pamphlet responds to criticisms regarding the Treatise.
(5) Philosophical Essays Concerning Human Understanding. By the Author
of the Essays Moral and Political (1748)
Notes: published anonymously; later retitled Enquiry
Concerning Human Understanding. This is a popularized version of key themes
that appear mainly in the Treatise, Book 1.
(6) A True Account of the Behavior and conduct of Archibald Stewart, Esq; late Lord Provost of Edinburgh. In a letter to
a Friend (1748).
Notes: 51 page pamphlet published anonymously as
a defense of Archibald Stewart, Lord Provost of Edinburgh, surrounding a political
controve rsy.
(7) An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals. By David Hume, Esq.
(1751)
Notes: This is a popularized version of key themes that appear mainly in the
Treatise, Book 3.
(8) The Petition of the Grave and Venerable Bellmen (or Sextons) of the
Church of Scotland (1751)
Notes: anonymous pamphlet surrounding the Church of Scotland's efforts to
increase their stipends.
(9) Political discourses. By David Hume Esq. (1752)
Notes: collection of essays on economic and political subjects, which was
eventually combined with his Essays Moral and Political (1741-1742)
and retitled Essays, Moral, Political and Literary in Hume's
collection of philosophical works, Essays and Treatises on Several Subjects
(1753).
(10) Scotticisms (1752).
Notes: 6 page pamphlet published anonymously, listing
Scottish idioms.
(11) The History of England,
from the Invasion of Julius Cæsar to the Revolution in 1688 (1754-1762)
Notes: published in four installments: (a) The history of Great
Britain. Vol. I. Containing
the reigns of James I. and Charles I. By David Hume, Esq. (1754); (b)
The history of Great Britain.
Vol. II. Containing the Commonwealth, and the reigns
of Charles II. and James II. By
David Hume, Esq. (1757); (c) The history of England, under the House of Tudor Comprehending the reigns of K. Henry VII.
K. Henry VIII. K. Edward VI. Q. Mary, and Q. Elizabeth.
... By David Hume, Esq (1759); (d) The history of England,
from the invasion of Julius Cæsar to the accession
of Henry VII. ... By David Hume, Esq. (1762).
(12) Essays and Treatises on Several Subjects. By David Hume, Esq; In four volumes (1753)
Notes: Hume's collected philosophical works, which includes (a) Essays, Moral
and Political, (b) Philosophical Essays concerning Human Understanding, (c)
Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals, and (d) Political Discourses.
Essays from Four Dissertations (1757) were later added.
(13) Four Dissertations. I. The Natural History of Religion. II. Of the Passions. III. Of Tragedy.
IV. Of the Standard of Taste. By David Hume, esq. (1757)
Notes: this volume was originally to include "Of Suicide" and "Of
the Immortality of the Soul," which were removed at the last minute and
appeared in 1783 in an unauthorized posthumous edition. The four essays in
Four Dissertations were later added to various sections of Essays
and Treatises on Several Subjects.
(14) Letter to Critical Review, April 1759, Vol. 7. pp. 323-334
Notes: defense of William Wilkie's epic poem Epigoniad.
(15) Expos‚ succinct de la contestation qui s'est
,lev,e entre M. Hume et M. Rousseau, avec les piŠces
justificatives (1766)
Notes: 127 page pamphlet containing letters between Hume and Rousseau, published
anonymously, translated from English by J.B.A. Suard.
The pamphlet was translated back to English in A Concise and Genuine account
of the Dispute between Mr. Hume and Mr. Rousseau:
with the Letters that Passed Between them during their Controversy (1766).
(16) Advertisement to Baron Manstein's Memoirs
of Russia, Historical,
Political and Military, from MDCXXVII, to MDCXLIV (1770)
Notes: the opening advertisement in this work is signed by Hume.
(17) The Life of David Hume, Esq. Written by Himself (1777)
Notes: The only authorized edition of this work is that contained in the 1777
edition of Essays and Treatises on Several Subjects. This separately
published edition includes "Letter from Adam Smith, LL.D. to William
Strahan, Esq".
(18) Dialogues Concerning Natural religion. By
David Hume, Esq. (1779)
Notes: posthumous edition from manuscript, contains
Hume's most detailed attack on natural religion.
(19) Essays on Suicide, and the Immortality of the Soul, ascribed to the late David Hume, Esq. Never before Published.
With Remarks, intended as an Antidote to the
Poison contained in these Performances, by the Editor. To which is added,
Two Letters on Suicide, from Rosseau's [sic] Eloisa (1783)
Notes: unauthorized publication of the two essays that were originally associated
with Four Dissertations.
The cautious attitude Hume recommends is noticeably absent
in moral philosophy, where "systems and hypotheses" have also "perverted
our natural understanding," the most prominent being the views of the
moral rationalists -- Samuel Clarke, Locke, and William Wollaston, the theories
of "the selfish schools" -- Hobbes and Mandeville -- and the pernicious
theological ethics of "the schools," whose promotion of the dismal
"monkish virtues" frame a catalogue of virtues diametrically opposed
to Hume's. Although he offers arguments against the "systems" he
opposes, Hume thinks the strongest case against them is to be made descriptively:
all these theories offer accounts of human nature that experience and observation
prove false.
Against the moral rationalists -- the intellectualists of moral
philosophy -- who hold that moral judgments are based on reason, Hume maintains
that it is difficult even to make their hypothesis intelligible (T, 455-470;
EPM, Appendix I). Reason, Hume argues, judges either of matters of fact or
of relations. Morality never consists in any single matter of fact that could
be immediately perceived, intuited, or grasped by reason alone; morality for
rationalists must therefore involve the perception of relations. But inanimate
objects and animals can bear the same relations to one another that humans
can, though we don't draw the same moral conclusions from determining that
objects or animals are in a given relation as we do when humans are in that
same relation. Distinguishing these cases requires more than reason alone
can provide. Even if we could determine an appropriate subject-matter for
the moral rationalist, it would still be the case that, after determining
that a matter of fact or a relation obtains, the understanding has no more
room to operate, so the praise or blame that follows can't be the work of
reason.
Reason, Hume maintains, can at most inform us of the tendencies
of actions. It can recommend means for attaining a given end, but it can't
recommend ultimate ends. Reason can provide no motive to action, for reason
alone is insufficient to produce moral blame or approbation. We need sentiment
to give a preference to the useful tendencies of actions.
Finally, the moral rationalists' account of justice fares no
better. Justice can't be determined by examining a single case, since the
advantage to society of a rule of justice depends on how it works in general
under the circumstances in which it is introduced.
Thus the views of the moral rationalists on the role of reason
in ethics, even if they can be made coherent, are false.
Hume then turns to the claims of "the selfish schools,"
that morality is either altogether illusory (Mandeville) or can be reduced
to considerations of self-interest (Hobbes). He argues that an accurate description
of the social virtues, benevolence and justice, will show that their views
are false.
There has been much discussion over the differences between
Hume's presentation of these arguments in the Treatise and the second
Enquiry. "Sympathy" is the key term in the Treatise,
while benevolence does the work in the Enquiry. But this
need not reflect any substantial shift in doctrine. If we look closely, we
see that benevolence plays much the same functional role in the Enquiry
that sympathy plays in the Treatise. Hume sometimes describes benevolence
as a manifestation of our "natural" or "social sympathy."
In both texts, Hume's central point is that we experience this "feeling
for humanity" in ourselves and observe it in others, so "the selfish
hypothesis" is "contrary both to common feeling and to our most
unprejudiced notions" (EPM, 298).
Borrowing from Butler and Hutcheson, Hume argues that, however
prominent considerations of self-interest may be, we do find cases where,
when self-interest is not at stake, we respond with benevolence, not indifference.
We approve of benevolence in others, even when their benevolence is not, and
never will be, directed toward us. We even observe benevolence in animals.
Haggling over how much benevolence is found in human nature is pointless;
that there is any benevolence at all refutes the selfish hypothesis.
Against Hobbes, Hume argues that our benevolent sentiments
can't be reduced to self-interest. It is true that, when we desire the happiness
of others, and try to make them happy, we may enjoy doing so. But benevolence
is necessary for our self-enjoyment, and although we may act from the combined
motives of benevolence and enjoyment, our benevolent sentiments aren't identical
with our self-enjoyment.
We approve of benevolence in large part because it is useful.
Benevolent acts tend to promote social welfare, and those who are benevolent
are motivated to cultivate the other social virtue, justice. But while benevolence
is an original principle in human nature, justice is not. Our need for rules
of justice isn't universal; it arises only under conditions of relative scarcity,
where property must be regulated to preserve order in society.
The need for rules of justice is also a function of a society's
size. In very small societies, where the members are more of an extended family,
there may be no need for rules of justice, because there is no need
for regulating property -- no need, indeed, for our notion
of property at all. Only when society becomes extensive enough that it is
impossible for everyone in it to be part of one's "narrow circle"
does the need for rules of justice arise.
The rules of justice in a given society are "the product
of artifice and contrivance." They are constructed by the society to
solve the problem of how to regulate property; other rules might do just as
well. The real need is for some set of "general inflexible rules...adopted
as best to serve public utility" (EPM, 305).
Hobbesians try to reduce justice to self-interest, because
everyone recognizes that it is in their interest that there be rules regulating
property. But even here, the benefits for each individual result from the
whole scheme or system being in place, not from the fact that each just act
benefits each individual directly. As with benevolence, Hume argues that we
approve of the system itself even where our self-interest isn't at stake.
We can see this not only from cases in our own society, but also when we consider
societies distant in space and time.
Hume's social virtues are related. Sentiments of benevolence
draw us to society, allow us to perceive its advantages, provide a source
of approval for just acts, and motivate us to do just acts ourselves. We approve
of both virtues because we recognize their role in promoting the happiness
and prosperity of society. Their functional roles are, nonetheless, distinct.
Hume compares the benefits of benevolence to "a wall, built by many hands,
which still rises by every stone that is heaped upon it, and receives increase
proportional to the diligence and care of each workman," while the happiness
justice produces is like the results of building "a vault, where each
individual stone would, of itself, fall to the ground" (EPM, 305).
"Daily observation" confirms that we recognize and
approve of the utility of acts of benevolence and justice. While much of the
agreeableness of the utility we find in these acts may be due to the fact
that they promote our self-interest, it is also true that, in approving of
useful acts, we don't restrict ourselves to those that serve our particular
interests. Similarly, our private interests often differ from the public interest,
but, despite our sentiments in favor of our self-interest, we often also retain
our sentiment in favor of the public interest. Where these interests concur,
we observe a sensible increase of the sentiment, so it must be the case that
the interests of society are not entirely indifferent to us.
With that final nail in Hobbes' coffin, Hume turns to develop
his account of the sources of morality. Though we often approve or disapprove
of the actions of those remote from us in space and time, it is nonetheless
true that, in considering the acts of (say) an Athenian statesman, the good
he produced "affects us with a less lively sympathy," even though
we judge their "merit to be equally great" as the similar acts of
our contemporaries. In such cases our judgment "corrects the inequalities
of our internal emotions and perceptions; in like manner, as it preserves
us from error, in the several variations of images, presented to our external
senses" (EPM, 227). Adjustment and correction is necessary in both cases
if we are to think and talk consistently and coherently.
"The intercourse of sentiments" that conversation
produces is the vehicle for these adjustments, for it takes us out of our
own peculiar positions. We begin to employ general language which, since it
is formed for general use, "must be moulded on some general views ...
." In so doing, we take up a "general" or "common point
of view," detached from our self-interested perspectives, to form "some
general unalterable standard, by which we may approve or disapprove of characters
and manners." We begin to "speak another language" -- the language
of morals, which "implies some sentiment common to all mankind, which
recommends the same object to general approbation, and makes every man, or
most men, agree in the same opinion or decision concerning it. It also implies
some sentiment, so universal and comprehensive as to extend to all mankind,
and render the actions and conduct, even of the persons the most remote, an
object of applause or censure, according as they agree or disagree with that
rule of right which is established. These two requisite circumstances belong
alone to the sentiment of humanity here insisted on" (EPM, 272). It is
the extended or extensive sentiment of humanity -- benevolence
or sympathy -- that for Hume is ultimately "the foundation of morals."
But even if the social virtues move us from a perspective
of self-interest to one more universal and extensive, it might appear that
the individual virtues do not. But since these virtues also receive
our approbation because of their usefulness, and since "these advantages
are enjoyed by the person possessed of the character, it can never be self-love
which renders the prospect of them agreeable to us, the spectators, and prompts
our esteem and approbation" (EPM, 234).
Just as we make judgments about others, we are aware, from
infancy, that others make judgments about us. We desire their approval and
modify our behavior in response to their judgments. This love of fame
gives rise to the habit of reflectively evaluating our own actions and character
traits. We first see ourselves as others see us, but eventually we develop
our own standards of evaluation, keeping "alive all the sentiments of
right and wrong," which "begats, in noble natures, a certain reverence"
for ourselves as well as others, "which is the surest guardian of every
virtue" (EPM, 276). The general character of moral language, produced
and promoted by our social sympathies, permits us to judge ourselves and others
from the general point of view, the proper perspective of morality. For Hume,
that is "...the most perfect morality with which we are acquainted"
(EPM, 276).
Hume summarizes his account in this definition of virtue,
or Personal Merit: "every quality of the mind, which is useful
or agreeable to the person himself or to others,
communicates a pleasure to the spectator, engages his esteem, and is admitted
under the honourable denomination of virtue or merit" (EPM, 277). That
is, as observers -- of ourselves as well as others -- to the extent that we
regard certain acts as manifestations of certain character traits, we consider
the usual tendencies of acts done from those traits, and find them useful
or agreeable, to the agent or to others, and approve or disapprove of them
accordingly. A striking feature of this definition is its precise parallel
to the two definitions of cause that Hume gave as the conclusion
of his central argument in the first Enquiry. Both definitions pick
out features of events, and both record a spectator's reaction or response
to those events.