Blog B - Hume: Do I Really "Know" Anything?

10/13/2015

Steven Ansell

10/13/2015 11:27:05 am

Discussion Question #4: How do you suppose Hume would account for creativity, believing as he did that all of our ideas come from previous sense experience?

I suppose that Hume would account for creativity by saying that all of our creative ideas and actions relate to our past experiences. In other words, he would say that any creativity that arises in our lives stems from our past. Although creativity is spontaneous, it is reasonable. I agree with Hume, in the sense that our experiences in life shape our future and any decisions that we may face.

Sam Gregg

10/19/2015 05:39:52 am

Do you think it is possible to be a rationalist without believing in god?

Yes. Being a rationalist entails utilizing your senses and your surroundings and making reasonable assertions based upon what you see. Given that believing in god requires some degree of faith in an unknown entity, rationalism implies the opposite. Being a rationalist, one could assume everything is the way it is without a god. This coincides with the rationalist belief that everything is as it seems.

Adel Soliman

10/19/2015 05:50:49 am

Discussion Question #1: Would Maurice agree with Leibniz or Hume? What about Jenny?

Maurice would strongly side with Leibniz. She specifically states that people can predict all kinds of things. Hume preaches on how you can not make assumptions unless they are math based or logically impossible for anything else to happen. Maurice assumed Jenny would like the drink since it tasted like everything she likes yet Jenny ended up greatly disliking it. Jenny would strongly side with Hume's philosophy. She believes that nothing can be determined from simple logical reason. Jenny would agree that no one can claim that the sun will rise tomorrow even though it has risen everyday before. She claimed that just because she enjoyed all the flavors of the new drink, that does not mean she will enjoy the drink.

Mya

10/20/2015 05:02:21 pm

Question #4-- How do you suppose Hume would account for creativity, believing as he did that all of our ideas comes from previous sense experience?

Creativity isn't the creation of new ideas, it's more the variation of something new. Taking new concepts and turning them into different ones, or expanding on them, or looking at them in a different way. For example, monsters such as vampires or angels-- they were new ideas at one point, from some one, but they just build on previous knowledge. Angels are the combination of humans and winged animals, the wings from birds, and vampires are undead humans who drink blood-- a creative combination of traits no doubt but all coming from previous notions of things like blood, death, and the human body.

Abby Westgate

10/21/2015 04:55:03 am

Discussion Question 2: Describe a circumstance under which the sun would not rise tomorrow, or snow would not feel cold, or a rock would not fall.

If we suddenly woke up and the acceleration of a falling object due to gravity became zero, a rock would not fall. Nothing would fall-- it would all float away from the Earth's surface. Our whole perception of life on Earth would change. Right now we depend on the assumption that the conditions on Earth will always remain the same, but if something were to change the pull of gravity, we would realize we don't really know anything about our planet.

Molly Masonius

10/21/2015 05:36:13 am

Question #3: Do you think it is possible to be a rationalist without believing in God?

Yes, I do believe it's possible to be a rationalist without believing in God. Rationalism is the view that we can learn important things about the world by examining the contents of our own minds, and that we can use reason alone to gain scientific knowledge of the future. In other words, you're using your ability to see and hear your surroundings in order to create knowledgeable assumptions, and you don't need God to tell you what you see.

Tyler Duane

10/21/2015 05:51:29 am

Do you think it is possible to be a rationalist without believing in god?

Yes it is possible. Everything you see can be touched and sounds around you can be heard. Religion is believing in an unknown power that is greater than humans while being a rationalist means focusing on real life and everything around you. You can believe in a god being a rationalist but most do not and only worry about everything around them. Religion and rationalist have very different and conflicted beliefs.

blake patterson

10/22/2015 09:13:25 am

Do you think it is possible to be a rationalist without believing in God?

Yes, it is possible because being a rationalist means using your senses to gather conclusions. And while most rationalists do utilize their human senses and scientific fact to prove theories, there are rationalists that believe in God and use that belief as the divine source of everything created.

Emilie Weiner

10/22/2015 09:26:56 am

Do you think it is possible to be a rationalist without believing in God?
No, I don't believe that one can be a rationalist without believe in God. If rationalism is defined as the view that we can learn important things about the world by examining the contents of ones own mind and use reason to gain scientific knowledge of the future, I don't see how a nonreligious person would be able to believe in this. Science is proven through experimentation and logical reasoning, not just that of the own mind. I believe that examining one's own mind is an important part of being a reflective person and learning more about oneself, but not learning more about the world as a whole. Rationalism is highly linked with the idea of God and how he created people, so the two ideas are hard to be separated. I think the idea of God should be apart from philosophy and how we choose to govern the exploration of the world and what it holds.

Natalie Hillier and Victoria Scamardella

10/22/2015 09:29:54 am

Discussion Question #4: How do you suppose Hume would account for creativity, believing as he did that all of our ideas come from previous sense experience?

In our opinion, we believe that Hume would then not agree that our ideas are creative because they are not original ideas. If our ideas come from previous sense experience, it has already been thought of, thus we can not take ownership of them and suggest that they are creative.

Haley Watson

10/22/2015 09:42:03 am

How do you suppose Hume would account for creativity, believing as he did that all of our ideas come from previous sense experience?

I suppose Hume would say that creativity comes from reflecting on our previous sense experience. Our reflections come from our ideas of goodness and power. These reflections can display our true ideas, and allow them to come into the outside world. Creativity starts from the inside and carry on to the outside.

Shea Cody

10/22/2015 09:44:44 am

1. What is rationalism? Which philosopher holds this view?
Rationalism is the belief that we cannot believe anything just because it happens repeatedly. If there is no proof other than it always happens then there is no reason it will happen again or is guaranteed to happen again. Experience proves nothing. Leibniz was the philosopher who believed in rationalism.

Kelly Cruz and Jane Breslin

10/22/2015 09:55:39 am

Discussion Question #2
Humans cannot explain or examine the world based solely on reasoning because our perceptions are limited. An example would be how the sun rises everyday. If the day is cloudy and we cannot see it, we still believe the sun has risen. Not only do we expect the sun to rise, but its cycle has been scientifically proven.
Another example includes if a rock does not fall on earth. This would be unexpected because the gravitational force of the earth would no longer ground us. The moon has a lower gravitational pull, thus allowing astronauts to suspend in air longer than on earth. People experience some force upon their body, which is the mass times the gravity of the planet. Even though we cannot see it, we do see the end results of gravity.

Tim Mills / Erik Dark link

10/22/2015 11:25:31 am

#2
If the sun would not rise tomorrow, or the snow would not feel cold, or a rock would not fall, then it would most certainly nothing but people screaming or suffering. But how would be know that the sun has not risen? How would people know if the snow does not feel cold? How would people know if a rock does not fall? What we know about the sun is that it will rise everyday, even if we can't see it. We can be inside a room or the sun will be behind a mountain or clouds. We can't see it, but how do we know it has not risen? If we feel snow, it should be cold. That is not true for everybody. If someone's body or skin is colder then the snow for some reason then the snow would feel warmer. So is that out of the ordinary? Someone have skin that cold is a little odd. We can assume the the snow if cold, but it can feel warm. If a rock would not fall, does it even have potential energy? A rock should always fall, there is no doubt about that, but what if there are small strings that are hard to see. Everyone thinks that a rock should fall but it is stuck in air. The rock is not falling.

Joseph Dark link

10/22/2015 03:43:31 pm

3. Do you think it's possible to be a rationalist without believing in god? Explain.
Honestly it seems like it depends if its possible to be rationalist without believing in god. To make it simple think about the bible. The bible "was written" by god, many people believe that. So using that logic he has to be real. The thing is though how do we truly know that he wrote it? it was passed down orally. Orally passed stories and facts tend to differ then originally stated because mispronounced words and other such errors. It really depends on how much you believe in god that he exists and how much water the facts of god existing/not exist hold.

Pat Monaghan

10/23/2015 05:25:21 pm

Describe a circumstance under which the sun would not rise tomorrow, or snow would not feel cold, or a rock would not fall.

If everything we know to be certain was no longer certain human beings would make themselves sure of the world. The majority of mankind would go outside if not told to do otherwise by the media. We would explore the possibilities and the boundaries of our new physical world. We would create new reason. we would make claims and argue like the first to write history did. we would be the founders of a new history.

Ricky Wild

10/23/2015 05:47:06 pm

Do you think it is possible to be a rationalist without believing in God? Explain.

I think that everyone has there own rational thoughts, including religious people. Everyone assumes that the sun will rise tomorrow in the morning like it has the rest of our lives and this is a scientific deduction occuring in everyone's head. Physcologically, everyone comes up with answers and general ideas about their surroundings and what they will do next. This ability to do something by making conclusions about their surroundings is instinct. Unlike animals, which can only rely on instict, our mind is constantly questioning, on a deep level, our very existence. This is known as our conscious. Our conciousness forces us to stretch out past our "instinctual" or "animalistic" ways and strive for an importance. This need for importance is where humans developed religions and ways to live life.
Religious people are still rationalists because they make instinct-like decisions everyday, just like every other human being walking the earth.

Zack Forest

10/23/2015 06:28:00 pm

Describe a circumstance under which the sun would not rise tomorrow, or snow would not feel cold, or a rock would not fall.

People are in the habit of assuming whether we like it or not. When we assume something, essentially we are taking a risk, or a bet as one could say. Some assumptions have better odds than others. For instance, the assumption that I will have school on Monday is much more likely than someone assuming that the world-ending asteroid is coming this year, or that Yellowstone will erupt. However, while the chance may be extremely unlikely and nearly impossible from our point of view, change on a world scale happens on a nearly a regular basis from the view stretching the many millions of years of our earth's history. We all make the same assumption that we will continue each day in a broadly similar way because to be frank, an apocalyptic scenario is not in our best interest. If we spent each day thinking about nuclear war, Yellowstone erupting, and world-ending astronomical events, we would go crazy and never complete anything. We as a people rationally look at things, both the good and bad sides, to make the assumption in our best interest. One of these assumptions is that the sun will rise tomorrow, the snow will feel cold, and the rock might fall.

Hannah Wallis and Logan Applegate

10/23/2015 06:38:43 pm

Discussion Question 2: Describe a circumstance under which the sun would not rise tomorrow, or snow would not feel cold, or a rock would not fall.

In some parts of the country, the sun does not rise everyday. In Alaska there are several days, even months, where theres is complete darkness for 24 hours. Going to a place like that assuming there would be a sun rise everyday would be a rude awakening. This is a rare occurrence in nature where relying on a past experience would prove inaccurate for the tie being.

Gabriela Recalde

10/23/2015 06:51:38 pm

Discussion Question 2: Describe a circumstance under which the sun would not rise tomorrow, or snow would not feel cold, or a rock would not fall.

A circumstance under which any of these things would be a confusing, twisted version of a miracle. Through discussion in class, reading the article, and doing extra research, it has become evident that Hume did not believe in the possibility of miracles. He only trusted habit and scientific facts. This being said, all "miracles" ,as Hume puts it, can be explained with science and math. So, to answer the question, I cannot describe such a circumstance because the sun always rises, snow is always cold, and objects will always fall freely downward. I know these facts, both through scientific evidence and human experience.

Skye post

10/25/2015 04:06:32 pm

#4)

Hume believed all of our ideas came from previous experiences. However, this idea may be flawed. When children are young, they are extremely creative. How could they have such ideas with only 3 years of experience on earth? Hume would then have to believe they had more experience prior to their 3 years on earth; which further suggests in something supernatural, like a god. But Hume did not believe in God. Even if creativity wasn't accounted for, how could we conceptualize ideas only from prior knowledge? I can imagine events and scenarios that haven't happened to me in the past. This disproves Hume's belief. In all, Hume can rationally believe there is no god, but not while believing our ideas come from previous experiences. Hume could believe our ideas come from previous experiences, but not without believing in God.

Kristen Wimmer

10/29/2015 09:06:56 pm

Question #3 Do you think it is possible to be a rationalist without believing in God?
Yes, and I say this because this question is worded in such a way where "God" is capitalized, specifying to be the kind of god in Christianity, Islam, or Judaism. However, i think some religions and philosophies most certainly practicing rationalism without having faith in God. For example, in Taoism, there is no belief or worship in a central "God" however. it is believed that there is a divine force behind all changes in the universe. This divine force is not something an empiricist could prove exists. Through sensational evidence we can neither prove something like the Oversoul, which is not a "God", but rather an energy force believed to connect everything in the universe. While these philosophies incorporate empiricism, they also integrate rationalism, and I personally, as more of an agnostic, find that it is best to find the right balance between the two.

Devon Barnes

11/2/2015 06:21:01 pm

How do you suppose Hume would account for creativity, believing as he did that all of our ideas come from previous sense experience?

I guess that Hume would say that there really isn't such thing as creativity anymore. Considering he believes that all our ideas come from previous sense experience, he would say that we were creative once but that it no longer exists. The only time creativity existed was at the beginning of human existence and now it is all just being repeated.

English and Philosophy