Instinct, Not Reason as a Determinant of Belief: Hume’s Idea of Necessary Connexion

University of Santo Tomas

Faculty of Arts and Letters

INSTINCT, NOT REASON AS A DETERMINANT OF BELIEF: HUME’S IDEA

OF NECESSARY CONNEXION

Submitted by: Ysabela Gabrielle B. Marasigan

Submitted to: Br. Romulado E. Abulad, SVD, Ph. D.

In Partial Fulfillment in Rationalism and Empiricism

December 12, 2015

!1
 Instinct, Not Reason as a Determinant of Belief: Hume’s Idea of Necessary Connexion

Abstract: This paper aims to prove that the source of our judgements are not
mainly based on logic and reason, but on experience, learned pre-determined
concepts, and instinct. I am discussing through the light of David Hume’s
philsophical arguments, highlighting his Idea of Necessary Connexion. We are
naturally inclined to believe that the world’s events are how they are because of
the constant repetition of our experiences — Matters of Fact. Our beliefs
become a result of our natural tendency and instinct. This paper is not only
written for students who have a strong background in Philosophy, but also those
who have a great interest in it. I believe that although Hume’s scepticism may
not be appreciated by all, this paper emphasizes and presents why he is known
as the thinker who became the most systematic presentor of philosophical
empiricism.

I. Hume’s Life

1David Hume was born in a moderately comfortable family on April 26, 1711 at Edinburgh,

Scotland to the lawyer Joseph Home and Katherine Falconer. Growing up, he was exposed to religious

works, which eventually challenged him to obtain a list of vices from The Whole Duty of Man, a

seventeenth-century devotional book.

Unlike other philosophers, Hume did not believe in the quality of education that was offered to

him by Edinburgh College. Despite this, he was able to attain a course, but did not take a degree.

College education to Hume was not much of use because according to him, the lectures of the

professors are nothing but dictations of books. He then proceeded to independent study and reflection.

He did not follow his father’s wish for him to take the path of law as a profession because he could

only see himself living a life of a scholar and philosopher.

1 Radcliffe, Elizabeth, A Companion to Hume’s Philosophy (Australia: Blackwell Publishing,

Ltd., 2008), 3.
!2
 Instinct, Not Reason as a Determinant of Belief: Hume’s Idea of Necessary Connexion

Hume’s life was not always unchallenging — he was diagnosed by his doctor as having “the

disease of the learned”. He suffered from four years of depression and this greatly affected his health

and career as a philosopher.

The shift in his life happened when he moved to France — this is when he changed his name

from “Home” to “Hume”, as a sign of breaking from his past and moving on from his depression.

Hume was able to create one of his most popular works A Treatise of Human Nature during his

residence at La Fleche. During its first release, the work was greatly criticized because it was

considered more as literature than philosophy. Over the years, it has developed to become the most

systematic presentation of philosphical empiricism. The work evolved to become more accessible to

the public and was eventually called Philosophical Essays Concerning Human Understanding. After

ten years, it became as we know it today An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding.

Hume’s wish was the publication of his work Dialogues Concerning Human Religion after his

death. Along with two of his other essays, David’s nephew was able to make this wish come true. The

slow decline of Hume’s health caused his death on August 25, 1776. 2Hume is now considered as the

greatest philosopher in the English language.

II. Empiricism

It is necessary that this paper first discusses the most basic of concepts to allow its readers, even

those who do not have a background in philosophy, to appreciate the arguments presented by Hume and

indeed realize why he is labeled as the most systematic presentor of philosophical empiricism.

2 Haldane, John, “Hume’s Destructive Genius” First Things (December 2011), 23.
!3
 Instinct, Not Reason as a Determinant of Belief: Hume’s Idea of Necessary Connexion

3The Empiricism thesis asserts that all knowledge is mainly obtained from sense experience.

This thesis rejects the Rationalism thesis’ claim that our knowledge is dependent upon the existence of

innate concepts. Unlike Rationalism, Empiricism emphasizes that reason does not give us superior

knowledge.

For instance, when a child is born into this world, he does not have any idea of what is

happening in his surroundings, which entails that he knows nothing. As the child grows older, he

becomes more knowledgeable of the existence objects, colors, odors, textures, tastes, and sounds

because of his first-hand experiences of such. It may be debated upon that the child may learn these

concepts through the basic and secondary education that is offered in schools and universities, which

do not require the child to experience in order to learn from books. However, knowing the concepts that

are stated in books will not flourish in the mind of the child, without the practical exercises that schools

offer. Some examples would be the usage of bulletin board displays of geometrical figures in

kindergarten and even science experiments in high school.

Everything we know today is not sourced from intuition, deduction, or innate knowledge. We

can conclude that Empiricism expounds on the idea that the affirmation of our knowledge on things and

basic concepts may only be acquired from sense experience.

3Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. “Rationalism vs. Empiricism” Empiricism, (March 2013).

Retrieved from: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rationalism-empiricism/#1.2.
!4
 Instinct, Not Reason as a Determinant of Belief: Hume’s Idea of Necessary Connexion

III. Perceptions of the Mind

4“Nihil est in intellectu quod non prius in sensu.”

There is nothing in the mind that is not first in the senses. As what has been explained earlier,

all knowledge can only be obtained from sense experience. Hume further elaborates this by arguing

that there is a a clear distinction between the initial experience of a certain occurrence and a memory of

that experience. He believes that these memories which have been stored in the mind or those which

have been converted into imagination will only be a simulation of the real experience, thus will never

reach the liveliness of the original event. I wish to take my experience as having been able to travel

some countries around the world as an example. One of the most beautiful tourist destinations I have

visited is the Tour Eiffel in Paris, France. The first appearance of the jaw-dropping 300-meter iron-

made tower left me speechless. Its exquisite details exposes the effort that has been executed by the

engineers in the accomplishment of the masterpiece. By the day, it is obvious that the Eiffel Tower

carries with it a great history that the French will always remember. By the night, I was able to realize

why Paris is the City of Love because of how the Eiffel Tower lights up the city. It may be considered

the mediator of Paris’ history and modernity.

5“The most lively thought is still inferior to the dullest sensation.” My explanation of how I

percieved the Eiffel Tower is not proportional to my direct experience of it. Hume tells us that no

matter how we greatly explain through words our experiences of occurences, just like how I described

4 Haldane, John, “Hume’s Destructive Genius” First Things (December 2011), 24.
5Hume, David, An Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding (New York: Bobbs Merrill Library of
Liberal Arts, 1955).
!5
 Instinct, Not Reason as a Determinant of Belief: Hume’s Idea of Necessary Connexion

the Eiffel Tower, they will never be as vivid as how I first sensed it. The explication I presented is now

just a mimic of the original sensation.

Hume therefore divides the perceptions of the mind into two species that are differentiated by

their specific degrees of force. 6The first distinction is the Thoughts or Ideas. This is considered as the

less lively perceptions of the mind. Hume explained that our minds may seem as having the capability

to transcend the universe. It is evident that as human beings, we are adept to imagine things beyond the

limits of nature and reality. We may even seem to imagine occurrences we have not experienced.

However, it is necessary that we take a closer examination in this endeavor. Hume proves that despite

this seemingly powerful mind, it is just a matter of combining, interchanging, exacerbating, or

diminishing objects or materials that are also in themselves subject to sense experience. For instance,

we may think of a flying monkey. The mind here is combining the act of flying, which it may have

sensed in an animal that in its nature flies, which may be a bird. Along with the the idea of flying, the

mind combines it with a monkey, which it may have sensed and experienced in the past. It can be

derived from this example that a flying monkey is not what the mind is accustomed to seeing — it may

even be considered impossible — but has the capability of imagining because of combining and

interchanging objects that were onced experienced. In the end, all these Thoughts or Ideas are subject

to sense experience.

7The second distinction is called Impressions. These can either be impressions of sensation or

impressions of reflection. The reason why these are considered as more vivid and forceful experiences

6Radcliffe, Elizabeth, A Companion to Hume’s Philosophy (Australia: Blackwell Publishing, Ltd.,

2008), 9.
7 Ibid.
!6
 Instinct, Not Reason as a Determinant of Belief: Hume’s Idea of Necessary Connexion

is because the former is what we hear, see, smell, touch, and taste. The latter, on the other hand, are

those feelings of passion such as love, pride, power, and desire. This now becomes the first hand

experience of a certain object or occurrence. Referring back to my example of the Tour Eiffel, my

experience of the exquisite Tower at that particular time is my impression of it. The manner of how I

saw its intricate design and the feeling of extreme happiness and pleasure is incomparable to the

manner of my explanation — no matter how detailed it may be.

A probable contradiction lies here. According to Hume, those people who have bodily

deficiencies such as deafness or blindness do not have the capability to experience color and sound,

thus leading to having no ability of having impressions of such. It can be concluded here that man

cannot speak of something he has never sensed or experienced.

IV. Ideas

Hume further elaborates that our knowledge is mainly based from our experiences by his

explanation of ideas.8 It was explained that there are simple and complex ideas, which are both mainly

derived from impressions. The former are the individual perceptions of particular experiences. On the

other hand, the latter is a compilation of simple ideas.

In Section III of Hume’s Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, he expounded that ideas

are essentially connected. The impressions we have experienced in the past allows us to combine and

create the wildest ideas in our imagination. There are three principles of connexion among ideas and

8Hume, David, Lorne Falkenstein, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding (Ontario:

Boardview Press, 2011), 135.
!7
 Instinct, Not Reason as a Determinant of Belief: Hume’s Idea of Necessary Connexion

these are coined as Resemblance, Contiguity, and Cause or Effect. Referring back to my experience of

the Eiffel Tower, it is undoubted that that I, along with my family, took numerous photos of the scenery.

The pictures we see today are resemblances of the original Tower. Another implication of resemblance

would be an instance when I saw the father of my bestfriend, who apparently I have not met.

Somewhere at the back of my mind, I concluded that that person is my bestfriend’s father because his

face is evidently similar to my bestfriend’s. At that moment, I knew that there was a necessary

resemblance of the father’s face to the thought or idea of my bestfriend.

The second connexion among ideas is Contiguity. This is that which will allow us to remember

an occurence through the experience of another occurence. My love for Paris was strengthened after

having the opportunity to have a glimpse of the Eiffel Tower. Now that it has been more than two years

since I last saw it, there are moments when I am greatly reminded of it. For instance, when I have a

sight of French bread, my initial thought would be the Eiffel Tower. French bread and the Eiffel Tower

are temporally contigous to me. Moreover, when I think about French bread and the Eiffel Tower, I

immediately think about Paris, France in general. This is now a manifestation that they are spatially

contigous.

The third connexion among ideas is Causation. Among those which have been aforementioned,

this third connexion is what Hume finds problematic and that which he greatly questions. I would like

to elaborate Hume’s idea of Causation and move on to a separate section as it is essential to the main

thrust of this paper.

!8
 Instinct, Not Reason as a Determinant of Belief: Hume’s Idea of Necessary Connexion

V. The Problem of Cause and Effect

9Section VII of Hume’s Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding focuses on the idea of

necessary connexion. He finds this greatly problematic because he believes that cause and effect is non-

existent. Part I of this section first establishes that there is a clear distinction between mathematical

sciences and morality. It is evident that in mathematics, we are able to determine without ambiguity the

difference between a square from a triangle because these are two geometrical figures that are

perceived without challenge as they are exact. Unlike those of vice and virtue and right and wrong, we

are not able to easily apprehend these because these are not clearly and readily registered in the mind.

These most probably lead to ambiguity. However, Hume believes that we must see this endeavor in the

proper light. Both their advantages and disadvatages place them on equal platforms, thus we must

consider both — although the other may be more ambigous than the other — equal. Mathematics may

seem to be more indisputable than morals, but it is a science that fairly requires an 10intricate chain of

reasoning in order to attain the higher truth of this science. Morals, on the other hand, must also be

handled with care. Not doing so would lead to an abstruer and limited progress in this kind of science.

Moreover, Hume discusses that there is nothing more obscure than power, force, energy, or

necessary connexion. In this section, he aimed to clear the ambiguity and establish the true meanings of

the aforementioned concepts. As what has been stated earlier, we cannot speak of anything we have not

previously felt. It is necessary then that I explain in this paper the Tripartite Soul in order to have a

clearer distinction of how beings sense. Man is a combination of Body and Soul. The Soul is divided

into three parts namely the Vegetative, Sentient, and Rational. The first is that which requires nutrition,

9 Ibid, 134.
10 Ibid.
!9
 Instinct, Not Reason as a Determinant of Belief: Hume’s Idea of Necessary Connexion

growth, and reproduction. The second is again segregated into two — external senses (seeing, smelling,

feeling, hearing, and tasting) and internal senses (common sense, imagination, fantasy, sense memory,

and aestimative sense). These two kinds of senses are driven by desire, which becomes the root cause

of man’s emotions and feelings. The third is reason, which is segregated again into cognition and

appetition. This is how man is able to have speculative knowledge and practical reason.

I would like to reiterate Hume’s principle that ideas are mere copies of impressions. These

impressions form our simple ideas and eventually combine to become complex. Hume’s philosophy

would always draw back to his idea of impressions, even his great enquiry on causation. He narrates:

11When we look about us towards external objects, and consider the operation of causes, we

are never able, in a single instance, to discover any power of necessary connexion; any

quality, which binds the effect to the cause, and renders the one an infallible consequence of

the other. We only find, that the one does actually, in fact, follow the other. (Section 7, 6)

I believe that we are immensely mistakened by concluding that an event following another

event is equivalent to an event causing another event. Hume states here that it may seem like it appears

to us outwardly through our senses, but there is no existing inward impression in the succession of

objects and events. From this premise, we can conclude that there can be no idea of power or necessary

connexion. According to Hume, it is a fact that when an event is first presented to us, we have no

ability to forsee what the effect of it is going to be, unless after we have experienced it through the

11 Ibid, 136.
!10
 Instinct, Not Reason as a Determinant of Belief: Hume’s Idea of Necessary Connexion

principle of impressions. Hume did not deny that we are capable of sensing 12solidity, extension, and

motion. However, these are separate qualities that are consummate in themselves. The internal power

that indicates that a precedent motion is the direct cause of an antecedent motion is already beyond the

capabilities of our internal and external senses.

For instance, the international and global issue of climate change has greatly affected how the

world leaders envisioned the future of their nations. There have been resolutions debated upon by the

United Nations and various organizations as to how this problem should be solved. The large factories

producing plastic, the usage of machines that discharge greenhouse gases, the smoke-belching in cars

and trucks, the burning and disposal of garbage, and the cutting down of trees are stated to have been

the reasons why the Earth is becoming hotter by the year. The evident melting of ice caps in the

Atlantic, North, and South Poles are the result of the heating of our planet. Experts have expressed that

if these conditions worsen, major cities around the world will be submerged and billions of people will

be affected. This is the reason why climate change is believed to be the avenue for all 196 countries to

come together and execute actions geared towards the solving of the issue at hand. Applying Hume’s

principle here makes us realize that the belief that the aformentioned reasons for the development of

climate change are mere assumptions. Claiming that the event of the usage of machines that produce

greenhouse gases as a cause to the event of the heating of the Earth is improbable because our senses

cannot perceive the necessary connexion between the two. Human beings, as inhabitants of this world,

can only perceive the first event following the second event. In other words, because we are in no

position to speak of things we have not yet experienced and sensed, we cannot claim that the

aforementioned reasons are truly the causes of climate change.

12 Ibid.
!11
 Instinct, Not Reason as a Determinant of Belief: Hume’s Idea of Necessary Connexion

13Moreover, after discussing events which we assume to perceive through our external senses,

Hume explores the internal power of our consciousness. The fact that through our own volition, we are

able to mobilize the organs of our body and control the faculties of our mind, we seem believe that this

is rooted from the influence of our will — which we conclude as our consciousness. Hume argues that

because we utilize the operations of our mind, this act is called reflection. He first examines the

volition we have over the organs in our body. Again, Hume reinstates that these natural events may

only appear to us through experience and we can never come to an absolute idea of an existence of a

cause for the movement of such. When I move my arm upward, I am acting upon the faculty of my

will. I now assume that it is through my will by which I am capable of controlling that movement —

and this, I am conscious of. However, Hume argues that although that internal movement may seem as

the result of my own volition, the means as to how the will seemed to cause the mobilization of my arm

is already beyond my comprehension.

Hume narrates further that not all internal motions of our body are within our control. He states:

Secondly, We are not able to move all organs of the body with a like authority; though we

cannot assign any reason besides experience, for so remarkable a difference between on and

the other. Why has the will an influence over the tongue and fingers, not over the heart and

liver? (Section 7, 12)

13 Ibid, 137.
!12
 Instinct, Not Reason as a Determinant of Belief: Hume’s Idea of Necessary Connexion

It is proven in this paragraph that even the volition of the will has its own particular limits. The

reason for such cannot be understood by mere reflection and mere operation of the mind. Going back to

the experience of a blind man who is not capable of comprehending colors and a deaf man who cannot

hear sounds, Hume also presents the impossibility of a person who was struck by palsy to apply control

over those parts which were affected. It may seem like there is a lack of power of the will, but what

Hume is emphasizing is that these instances may only be understood if thoroughly experienced.

However, because these instances are beyond what our internal senses apprehend, we cannot come to a

conclusion that being struck by palsy is the direct cause for the infliction of one’s will. These are two

separate events, which have an unknown internal power — there is no necessary connexion between

these events.

In the course of his discussion on his issue with the claim of a necessary connexion between

events, I believe that Hume is trying to prove that man intially created the concept of cause and effect.

It is evident that in the daily activities of our lives, the assumption of event X as a cause of event Y has

been conveniently derived to be coined as causation. The fact is that we cannot know the necessary

connexion. This is what Hume corrected for us and it has changed the direction of philosophy since

then.

VI. Sceptical Doubts Concerning the Operations of the Understanding

Section 1V of An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding is the most important aspect that

would support the claim of this paper. 14Hume here explains that human reason is divided in two kinds

— Relations of Ideas and Matters of Fact. The first may be best explained through Mathematics, which

14 Hume, David, An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding (New York: Oxford University Press).
!13
 Instinct, Not Reason as a Determinant of Belief: Hume’s Idea of Necessary Connexion

expresses its relation through numbers. This can be considered as apriori knowledge because it is not

dependent on anything else existing in the universe. For instance, we may also take this statement as a

mere relation of ideas: A bald person is a person without hair. Any person — whether intellectual or

foolish — would accept this statement without any reservations because it is clear that the predicate of

the subject is innately in the subject. It adds no new knowledge to our perception of a bald man. The

statement is sufficient enough that we need no experience to arrive at its validation. Hume does not find

this first kind of human reason problematic.

The second human enquiry is synthetic in nature, thus based on experience. Hume argued that

the contrary of an event we believe as permanent and as a matter of fact is still possible. It is usual that

when we have a sight of a dark cloud, we begin assuming that there will be a storm or heavy rain.

These are two events that usually follow each other. Referring back to Hume’s issue with the concept of

cause and effect, it is clear that in the aforementioned situation, we are in no position to forsee the event

that will follow the presence of the dark cloud because even if it may seem routinary that a heavy rain

follows it, the second event will always remain as just an assumption because it is something we have

yet to sense or experience. Matters of Fact is not only based on experience, but also in the problematic

concept of causation — that is why Hume also questions this second enquiry.

15The rising of the sun as a Matter of Fact is considered as permanent because we continually

experience it every single day we wake up. The experience of this supposed daily event is that which

allows us to believe that sun will rise again tomorrow morning. Hume here does not negate the fact that

the sun rose today, yesterday, the past weeks, and the past years. What he is trying to prove is that

15 Ibid.
!14
 Instinct, Not Reason as a Determinant of Belief: Hume’s Idea of Necessary Connexion

although we are accustomed to perceiving the sun rising every morning, it does not follow that the sun

will rise again tomorrow. It is beyond the capabilities of my understanding to forsee that as I write this

paper, I can be certain that tomorrow, there will still be a sun. Hume here states that there will always

be a probability that it will be non-existent.

I believe that because Matters of Fact are also dependent on impressions, we can conclude that

it can also be considered as a source of our ideas that we perceive as unchanging, thus true.

VII. Instinct, Not Reason as a Determinant of Belief

The first sections of this paper exposed and established Hume’s notion that there is nothing in

the mind that is not first in the senses. The species of perceptions of the mind namely Thoughts or Ideas

and Impressions are the basic foundations of Hume’s main arguments. As Hume progressed with his

philosophical work, he was able to distinguish the connections of ideas such as Resemblance,

Contiguity, and Cause and Effect. Hume is considered as a remarkable thinker because he shook the

basic concepts that people have long believed through the works of the Greeks, most especially

Aristotle. He made us question even the simplest notions we have of the world, which may have led to

a more difficult path in the attainment of true knowledge. Hume’s principle that is the main basis of

what I aim to emphasize in this paper is one of the kinds of human inquiry in his Sceptical Doubts

Concerning the Operations of the Human Understanding, which is Matters of Fact.

Before we were concieved into this world, it is reasonable to believe that there are already other

human beings, animals, and plants. Along with these, colors, shapes, and sizes have already been long

!15
 Instinct, Not Reason as a Determinant of Belief: Hume’s Idea of Necessary Connexion

established. Various calamities such as typhoons, tsunamis, and earthquakes have already occured. In

other words, there have been pre-determined ideas and events even before we were born.

I do not have an excellent memory to remember my experience during the first day I stepped in

primary school. All I know is as a child, I basically accepted all the concepts that were being taught to

me by my teachers. I am certain that I became knowledgeable of various colors because I was

presented with the different color palettes, which allowed me to distinguish one color from the another.

The manner as to how I was educated with shapes, on the other hand, was through my teacher’s

bulletin board displays in class discussions. Moreover, my Grade 1 Science classes introduced to me

the descriptions of rain, tsunamis, and earthquakes, through pictures and videos. I readily accepted all

these basic concepts and I believe that these kinds of information are the basis and foundation for my

knowledge today. These impressions have been the grounds of the ideas I have formed in my mind.

The knowledge I have gained from primary school to high school are what I regard today as

either matters of fact or relations of ideas. The pre-determined concepts that I have learned in the past

are then the bases for my judgements. I believe that these concepts have been embedded in me through

the volition of my will and the operations of my mind. However, as a stated earlier, despite the fact that

it was instilled in me through the the faculty of my will, the manner that I accepted these impressions

are questionable because as a child, these were simply registered in my brain without inquiry. In other

words, the notions on how objects are being described in this world did not come from my perspective.

It came from the pre-established ideas of the thinkers before me and I have accepted them and deemed

them as true because of habit and custom. My impressions, those which I have antecedently felt and

experienced, are then not extracted only from my direct experience of events, but what has been

!16
 Instinct, Not Reason as a Determinant of Belief: Hume’s Idea of Necessary Connexion

explained to me in the past. For instance, when I attended Math classes in Elementary and High School,

I did not question my teacher on the Mathematical principles being discussed to me, such as a triangle

having three sides. On the other hand, the thought of rain coming due to the sight of a dark cloud came

from the repetition of my experience of such.

I therefore conclude that the source of my beliefs are rooted not exactly from logic, but rather

my experiences in the past which have greatly affected my manner of perceiving the world.

16According to Hume, we think that there is a world not from deduction, but from the fact that we are

naturally inclined to think in such manner through habit and custom. This natural inclination, which I

refer to as instinct, is the determinant of my belief — not reason.

16 Haldane, John, “Hume’s Destructive Genius” First Things (December 2011), 25.
!17
 Instinct, Not Reason as a Determinant of Belief: Hume’s Idea of Necessary Connexion

Bibliography

A. Primary Sources

Hume, David, A Treatise of Human Nature: Being (London: White Hart, Cheapside, 1739).

Hume, David, An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding (New York: Oxford University Press,

2007).

Hume, David, An Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding (New York: Bobbs Merrill Library

of Liberal Arts, 1955).

Hume, David, Essays and Treatises on Several Subjects (Michigan: University of Michigan

Library, 2007)

B. Secondary Sources

I. Books

Allison, Henry, Custom and Reason in Nature A Kantian Reading of the First Book of the

Treatise (New York: Oxford University Press, 2008).

Hume, David, Lorne Falkenstein, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding (Ontario:

!18
 Instinct, Not Reason as a Determinant of Belief: Hume’s Idea of Necessary Connexion

Boardview Press, 2011).

Kail, P J E, Projection and realism in Hume’s Philosophy (New York: Oxford University Press,

2007).

Noonan, Harold, Hume on Knowledge (New York: Routledge, 1999).

Radcliffe, Elizabeth, A Companion to Hume’s Philosophy (Australia: Blackwell Publishing,

Ltd., 2008).

Wright, John, Hume’s A Treatise of Human Nature An Introduction (New York: United States of

America by Cambridge University Press, 2009).

II. Articles and Journals

Broughton, Janet, “Hume’s Ideas about Necessary Connection” Hume Studies, Vol. 13, No. 2

(November 1987).

Millican, Peter, Hume’s Idea of Necessary Connexion: Of What is the Idea?, “Power” and

“Necessity” in Hume’s Text, (Hertford College, Oxford. 2008), 9-11.

Sandis, Constantine, “The Meaning of Hume’s Necessary Connexions” Enquiry 61 Revisited,

(n.d.), 6-9.

!19
 Instinct, Not Reason as a Determinant of Belief: Hume’s Idea of Necessary Connexion

Fieser, James, “Eighteen Century British Reviews of Hume’s Writing” Journal of the History of

Ideas (October 1996), pp. 645-658.

Haldane, John, “Hume’s Destructive Genius” First Things (December 2011), pp. 23-25.

III. Online

Lacewing, Michael. “Hume on Causation”, On Causation (United Kingdom: Routledge Taylor

and Francis Group, n.d.) Retrieved from: http://documents.routledge-

interactive.s3.amazonaws.com/9781138793934/A2/Hume/HumeCausation.pdf

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. “Hume on Religion”, Empiricism, Scepticism, and the

Very Idea of God, (October 2005). Retrieved from: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hume-

religion/#EmpSceVerIdeGod.

!20