Would David Hume Try To Answer The Afterlife?

Have you ever wondered about the world beyond its original state? How we know that electricity produces a light bulb to light up or causes the sort of energy necessary to produce heat? But in the first place, what is electricity? Nor have we seen it and not we encountered it; however, we know what it can do, hence its effects. To help us better understand the notion of cause and effect, David Hume, an empiricist and skepticist philosopher, proposed the that there is no such thing as causation. In his theory, he explained the deliberate relationship between the cause and effect, and how the two factors are not interrelated. Think of it this way: sometimes we end up failing to light a match even though it was struck. The previous day, it lit up, but today it did not. Why? Hume’s theory regarding causation helps us comprehend matters of cause and effect, and how we encounter the effects in our daily lives, without the cause being necessary. According to Hume, since we never experience the cause of something, we cannot use inductive reasoning to conclude that one event causes another. In other words, causal necessity (the cause and effect being related in some way or another) seems to be subjective, as if it solely exists in our minds and not in the object itself.

I continued my habit of praying five times a day and just like the Imam preached it made me feel clean and safe. I understood that no matter what happened, it was intended by god and he was always there to protect me from evil. I felt happy and special. As time passed and I got access to the internet, I was exposed to the different point of views on religion. I became really interested in the religion vs science debates. In the ninth grade, when I got my first Black iPhone 3gs, I downloaded YouTube and for Hours would watch different religion vs science debates, on topics ranging from the origination of Earth, the universe, Life, to human morality and whether it only exists in religion, to the purpose of life, and whether religions are peaceful or violent. I would always get high on dopamine when the non-religious person would struggle to answer some questions and I felt lucky that god chose me to be born in a religion specifically the “Correct” religion. However, the more I continued to watch these debates, the more I noticed that the pro-science person always referred to facts and scientific proof and logic in their argument while the religious person used their “Holy book” to back their point of views. Then things started to get more complicated, in biology, we are taught that human and apes evolved from a common ancestor, while the major monolithic religions state that

Stephen Hume’s essay titled ‘The Spirit Weeps’ appeared in the Edomonton Journal and in some of the southeren newspapers between February and June 1988.The essay disscuss about the pathetic condition of Canadian aboriginals.The exhibition named ‘The Spirit Sings’conducted as a part of 1988 Winter Olympics shows the inhuman behavior of the officials towards aboriginals. The authorities were celebrating with the ruins of aboriginal culture. Colonization entirely damaged the culture and tradition of natives. Now they took the role of preserver and show their interest to materials rather than humans.Hume presents his views about the descriminations of authority towards the natives of Canada.

For example, in Genesis Noah was faced with ultimate test of certainty or doubt for God. When told to build an ark, he could have doubted God instantly. Why would he want to kill all of mankind except Noah and his family? Wasn’t he supposed to be a loving god? Yet Noah followed every single command that God gave him. He ignored all of the men that mocked him. He built a humongous ark that took years and years to build, filled it with an seven pairs of clean animals and a pair of unclean animals, and was in the ark for 150 days while the earth was flooded. That shows how certainty can turn into devotion and make you succeed, no matter if it takes a long time or you’re made fun of. Regardless, this type of faith shows how a certainty of God is not possible with

We can only do as much, or as well, as we know to do; and if that does not work, then one must ask: What am I to do? That is an excellent question, for it holds value for those who are willing and able to reveal its answer. The value of a well-formed question is found in the answer that it holds; that is, if by raising that question, we are able to behold the answer within it. Although I consider philosophical, theological, and rhetorical questions to be valuable when seeking insight and understanding, these are questions that are not meant to illicit a response, and therefore, they have no practical value. The only value of such questions is that they leave us open to other questions which may hold the answer. For example, when wondering

The questions behind death and the afterlife have existed among all people from an immemorial time. Where do we go, what is it like, who or what is there, is what I’m doing today have an impact on where I end up?

There are a number of universities in the United States that offer a liberal arts education. These particular universities encompass philosophy and theology as a part of their core curriculum. By taking such courses students are enabled to learn and understand more about the world around them and who they are. A question concerning the existence of God and the role of each individual in society gives rise to speculation. In his article “Why Study Philosophy and Theology”, Dr. Peter Kreeft makes a bold claim which indicates that “anyone who is simply not interested in philosophical questions is less than fully human…” He explains this claim by providing a continuous chain of arguments, in which each argument breaks down the proper reasoning behind why an individual should desire to learn about philosophy and theology. These arguments include the Goal of Education, the Big Picture, and Good Philosophy and Theology.

Philosophy (from Greek φιλοσοφία, philosophia, literally "love of wisdom"[1][2][3][4]) is the study of general and fundamental problems concerning matters such as existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language.[5][6] The term was probably coined by Pythagoras (c. 570 – c. 495 BC). Philosophical methods include questioning, critical discussion, rational argument and systematic presentation.[7][8] Classic philosophical questions include: Is it possible to know anything and to prove it?[9][10][11] What is most real? However, philosophers might also pose more practical and concrete questions such as: Is there a best way to live? Is it better to be just or unjust (if one can get away with it)?[12] Do humans have free

The basic problem with most religions in the world has always been that they presuppose faith; that is one cannot be reasoned into believing in a religion, if such was not the case then we would have seen a huge migration to one religion or another. In any given religion, the main proof of God’s

In explaining Hume’s critique of the belief in miracles, we must first understand the definition of a miracle. The Webster Dictionary defines a miracle as: a supernatural event regarded as to define action, one of the acts worked by Christ which revealed his divinity an extremely remarkable achievement or event, an unexpected piece of luck. Therefore, a miracle is based on one’s perception of past experiences, what everyone sees. It is based on an individuals own reality, and the faith in which he/she believes in, it is based on interior events such as what we are taught, and exterior events, such as what we hear or see first hand. When studying Hume’s view of a miracle, he interprets or defines a miracle as such; a miracle is a

Philosophy is the study of the nature of knowledge, reality, and existence. The occupation of the philosopher is in trying to understand the world around us, trying to determine the truth of the world and of humanity, and essentially to explain things which are more or less unexplainable. Certain issues have fascinated philosophers because they are universal and apply to all human beings regardless of class, gender, ethnicity, religion, or age. The concepts of human existence, why humans exist and what makes them exist are often discussed by philosophers. Perhaps the only concept which appears more frequently in philosophic writings than the topic of existence is the ideas about life and death. All human beings will eventually die; it is the one thing in life which is absolutely certain. What comes after this is a mystery. Is there an afterlife where we are either rewarded or punished? Is there reincarnation where we continually repeat the process of being born, of living, and of dying? Or, quite bleakly and uneventfully, is there nothing at all; do we just cease to be once we stop being alive? Chuang Tzu who is also known as Zhuangzhi wrote in the fourth century BCE while Socrates was a Greek philosopher who wrote about a century before Chuang Tzu. Two philosophers from different eras came up with some similar ideas despite the fact that they were separated by both time and geography; that mankind was fated to be born, to live for a short time, and

The Existential questions which are important to ask are, Why do we suffer? What happens after we die? and does god exist? Many religions will have answers for these questions, however the comparison between the Catholic viewpoint and the Secular Humanist viewpoint will be argued in this report.

One of the strengths that this article has is that they provided a broad hypothesis. It was not specific and that gave them more room to play around with how they want to test the beliefs on life-after-death. They basically just wanted to explore from what was found in previous search on the afterlife and find more detailed data. Another strengths in this article were the specific questions that the participants were asked about their beliefs in the afterlife. The

It’s the twenty first century. Scientists have found evidence of water on Mars, they have successfully cloned human embryos, and everyday, they are getting closer to finding a cure for cancer. Still, in a world of groundbreaking facts and evidences, where the newest discovery leaves older ones out of commission, we fool ourselves into blindly putting faith on a series of chronicles conceived during the primitive age. Religion probably started out as a result of mankind trying to explain the physical world, but then became a tool to control and oppress, a reason for bloodshed and hate. While religion may have been of great help in

The ultimate question that Hume seems to be seeking an answer to is that of why is that we believe what we believe. For most of us the answer is grounded in our own personal experiences and can in no way be justified by a common or worldly assumption. Our pasts, according to Hume, are reliant on some truths which we have justified according to reason, but in being a skeptic reason is hardly a solution for anything concerning our past, present or future. Our reasoning according to causality is slightly inhibited in that Hume suggests that it is not that we are not able to know anything about future events based on past experiences, but rather that we are just not rationally justified in believing those things that