Inquiry of Human Understanding

David Hume’s
Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding

In David Hume’s Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding he states that all human reason can be separated into two kinds, either Relations of Ideas or Matters of Fact.   This essay aims to explain Hume’s theory and clearly distinguish the differences between the two.   He gives examples of the two and why he believes this to be true for all people.   This is Hume’s version of a priori/a posteriori differentiation.
Relations of Ideas is defined by Hume as “the “sciences of geometry, algebra, and arithmetic” and “every affirmation which is either intuitively or demonstratively certain”.   These are the notions of beliefs that are cultivated entirely within the mind.   These beliefs cannot be disputed because they have no external reference to contradict them.   An example of a Relation of Idea is two plus two equals four or a square always has four sides.   Another example is a bachelor is not married.   The Relation of Idea is Hume’s a priori, which is by definition, knowledge that is based on reason, independent of experience.   Although Hume only briefly writes about the Relation of Ideas theory in the Inquiry, he does go into much more explanation when discussing the Matters of Fact theory.   Because he goes into much more detail the reader begins to also understand and distinguish from the first much more.
Hume wanted to explain the foundation of true knowledge; this is where the Matters of Fact came into play.   Matters of Fact are our beliefs in nature or what we experience.   He uses the example of the sun will raise tomorrow.   But, what he questions is, how do we know that the sun will rise tomorrow?   We don’t according to Hume.   We rely on our experience to make judgments for our future.   We refer to this as cause and effect.   Although we rely on cause and effect heavily, is it really a fact?   Even though we must continue to live this way, it does not necessarily make it fact.   A person will conclude that if...