Monday, November 16, 2009
The hue of Hume
I think Hume is making a lot of arguments but one that sticks out particularly to me, and how I interpret much of what he is saying is that their is two ways to understand the world. One is a philosophical way. We can philosophize and hypothesize about the nature of gravity, or life, or science but at it's core we can never truly understand these things as we only sees them as the minds sees them, as humans. On the other hand we claim to understand fire, water, rock, and earth and yet we are barely able to grasp the surface of what these things mean. We assign numbers and names to the things that we do not understand to mask our inability to really grasp the true forces of nature that guide and control these things. While I disagree about the inability to grasp science, I do agree that the realms of science and philosophy are very different and are both much easier understood when they do not cross.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree very much with what you're saying, Adam. Just because we measure something does not mean we truly understand it. I think a good example of this might be the concept of "time". We can certainly measure it in seconds, hours, days, etc, but many of us would find it extremely difficult to explain time without using our man-made units as examples. While most of us can easily tell time and understand the idea of an "hour", the general public really doesn't understand what time is beyond that.
ReplyDeleteOh, and happy belated birthday, Adam!
Um, yeah: happy birthday, Adam! Does this mean you're an adult now? :)
ReplyDeleteI'd be interested in hearing more about what you mean by 'truly grasping' the concepts that you mention. Otherwise, it's hard to say whether we can do this or not. Matt & Eric raise interesting issues of naming or division, which could be two ways of 'grasping'.