William Of Ockham And David Hume

Good Essays
Discuss the fascinating parallels between William of Ockham and David Hume, highlighting for example, the Regularist View of Causality.
David Hume William of Ockham
Hume did not deny causation. He embraced it. But he did say that empirical methods could not logically prove its necessity, as observations only show a "constant conjunction" of events, a "regular succession" of A followed by B, which leads the mind to the inference of cause and effect. For Hume, causality is something humans naturally believe. Ockham readily grants that if the world has to be “held up” by conserving causes, then there must be a first among them because otherwise the set of conserving causes would constitute an uncountable quantity of actually existing things. It is in fact a tenet of belief that God is both an efficient and conserving cause of the cosmos, and Ockham accepts this tenet on faith.
We cannot logically know or prove causation and "matters of fact," as we can know and prove the "relations of ideas" such as mathematics and logic. But we have a natural belief in causation and in many matters of fact. There would be an infinite regress among causes if there were not a first cause; therefore, there must be a first cause, namely, God. If the chain of efficient causes that have produced the world as we know it today had no beginning, then it would form, not an extensive infinity, but an intensive infinity, which is harmless.
"Reason" cannot motivate our Beliefs. Reason is
Get Access