DAVID HUME

DAVID HUME

Thesis Statement: God is beyond human experience, thus, He doesn’t exist.

“Does a man of sense run after every silly tale of hobgoblins or fairies, and canvass particularly the evidence? I never knew anyone, that examined and deliberated about nonsense who did not believe it before the end of his enquiries.” - David Hume, Letters

Introduction of His life (http://www.biography.com/articles/David-Hume-9346827)

DAVID HUME. (born May 7 [April 26, Old Style], 1711, Edinburgh, Scot.—died Aug. 25, 1776, Edinburgh) Scottish philosopher, historian, economist, and essayist, known especially for his philosophical empiricism and skepticism.

Hume conceived of philosophy as the inductive, experimental science of human nature. Taking the scientific method of the English physicist Sir Isaac Newton as his model and building on the epistemology of the English philosopher John Locke, Hume tried to describe how the mind works in acquiring what is called knowledge. He concluded that no theory of reality is possible; there can be no knowledge of anything beyond experience. Despite the enduring impact of his theory of knowledge, Hume seems to have considered himself chiefly as a moralist.

Early life and works

Hume was the younger son of Joseph Hume, the modestly circumstanced laird, or lord, of Ninewells, a small estate adjoining the village of Chirnside, about nine miles distant from Berwick-upon-Tweed on the Scottish side of the border. David's mother, Catherine, a daughter of Sir David Falconer, president of the Scottish court of session, was in Edinburgh when he was born. In his third year his father died. He entered Edinburgh University when he was about 12 years old and left it at 14 or 15, as was then usual. Pressed a little later to study law (in the family tradition on both sides), he found it distasteful and instead read voraciously in the wider sphere of letters. Because of the intensity and excitement of his intellectual discovery, he had a nervous breakdown in 1729, from which it took him a few years to recover.

In 1734, after trying his hand in a merchant's office in Bristol, he came to the turning point of his life and retired to France for three years. Most of this time he spent at La Flèche on the Loire, in the old Anjou, studying and writing A Treatise of Human Nature. The Treatise was Hume's attempt to formulate a full-fledged philosophical system. It is divided into three books: book I, on understanding, aims at explaining man's process of knowing, describing in order the origin of ideas, the ideas of space and time, causality, and the testimony of the senses; book II, on the “passions” of man, gives an elaborate psychological machinery to explain the affective, or emotional, order in man and assigns a subordinate role to reason in this mechanism; book III, on morals, describes moral goodness in terms of “feelings” of approval or disapproval that a person has when he considers human behaviour in the light of the agreeable or disagreeable consequences either to himself or to others. Although the Treatise is Hume's most thorough exposition of his thought, at the end of his life he vehemently repudiated it as juvenile, avowing that only his later writings presented his considered views. The Treatise is not well constructed, in parts oversubtle, confusing because of ambiguity in important terms (especially “reason”), and marred by willful extravagance of statement and rather theatrical personal avowals. For these reasons his mature condemnation of it was perhaps not entirely misplaced. Book I, nevertheless, has been more read in academic circles than any other of his writings.

Thesis Points: God is beyond human experience, thus, He does not exist.

“Why bother?” asked by the atheists…or skeptics in that case.

The following points are critiques of David Hume pertaining to the Argument on DESIGN on which this argument says that all the order in the world has the divine origin and refer to a being who is God.

1. The argument begins with the observance of the beautiful order in nature. This order makes man to think upon unthinking materials which is responsible for the order we see in nature. For unthinkable materials do not contain the principle of orderliness within themselves. So, there must be an orderer who is responsible for the order in the nature. But this inference is uncertain as Hume says, because the subject lies entirely beyond the reach of human experience.

2. The whole Argument on Design lies on the causal proposition on the causes of order in the universe. The causal propositions lie on analogical basis of human intelligence. We cannot apply the analogy of the world into the analogy of the machine. If God then is what we tend to analogize, we try to bring down the highest possibilities of God into our limited comprehension and thus, we cannot reach and comprehend his being into our experience.

3. The order of the universe is simply an empirical fact and that we cannot infer from it the existence of God. Universe and God is two different entities. Seeing and observing the fact of the universe as it is, for it is simply the fact that we can see it. But on God, empirical statements cannot be determined his existence for it is beyond what we observe, see, or on every function of our senses and thus, we cannot know God.

4. Our ideas reach no further than our experiences. Since, we have no experience of the divine. Therefore, we cannot have the idea of the divine.

5. Hume accurately described the Argument from Design as "useless" because in and of itself it can never "establish any new principles of conduct and behavior." The Argument from Design only shows that there is an intelligent design in the universe; it tells us nothing about whether the entity cares about human beings, communicates with them, or has moral scruples. Of itself, intelligent design does not validate any theology beyond deism. (David Hume on the Argument from Design/ google.search)

6. ‘Christian God’ as Hume says could not be proven to be existed looking on human conditions where evil is present. If God is intelligible and good, why then, evil is present in the world? "Is he willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then is he impotent (without power). Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent (desires evil). Is he both able and willing: whence then is evil?"

7. The Argument on Design does not explain pain, suffering, and natural disaster. (David Hume on Wikipedia.html)

Conclusion

The human mind is definitely limited within the scope of his experience. Whatever he experienced, he will try to accept it as a being that exists, and in line with this thought, if he not experienced God, he will eventually not accept the existence of God. To experience, as Hume states that, is to have a sense experience that is observable on our senses and can be comprehended by the human reason alone. And if the human mind cannot comprehend it at all through empirical researches then it will reject it and accept it as incomprehensible.

There is a great leap of believing in God, atheists or skeptics will say. It seems that there is a missing link in inferring that God exists. There is a big short cut, by just observing that there is an order and beauty in the world, we leap to the conclusion that there must be an orderer for these things and this must be God? For Hume, it is not necessarily be God as the end of all the propositions. If we argue along the line that the cause of the order and beauty in the world is God, then probably there is a cause on which God causes the order and beauty in the world. A cause of God who is the cause of order and so on and so forth, as the mind comprehend at causality of things. There is this Ad finitum causes of causes.

Why bother at all discussing on God who is the all-knowing, omnipotent and all good but looking on the present reality where chaos and evil is present? And, I answer as my personal contribution to this skeptical argument, why then reasoning out God on the basis of our life in this world, why reasoning out life on the basis of God instead?

-----

“God himself has been mute on giving an authoritative answer to this unanswerable question since it was first asked and although there have been many who have gladly tried to answer it for him, no one has yet to hear the final word on the subject.”

Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Theologian who died in 1945 in the Flossenburg Concentration Camp

References

www.suite101.com/does_god_exist/western-philosophy

www.wpmued.org/hume

Standford Encyclopedia of Philosphy.html

Stumpf, Samuel Enoch and James Fieser. Socrates to Sarte, A History of Philosophy, Seventh Edition.

USA: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. 2005.

My ‘NOETIC MOMENTS’ with the AETAS

The primary source of this phenomenological paper is taken from my personal diary pages 115 - 155 during my SPFY (Spiritual Pastoral Formation Year) in St. Joseph Regional Seminary, Iloilo City, last year. I was assigned among the Indigenous People, particularly the ‘Aetas’ or ‘mga Ati’ in Brgy. Matag-ub, Janiuay, Iloilo. The Immersion Program was started September 29, 2008 until November 5, 2008.

INTRODUCTION

The stream of phenomenological being has a twofold bed: a material one, and a noetic one. (Quoted from the book of Husserl’s Ideas §85/p.251 by David Bell, Husserl. Great Britain: TJ Press Ltd, 1990. p.172). The former consists of sensuous hyle or hyletic data, the latter is an intentional morphe, or noesis.

The hyle (matter) is consists of material components such as sensations, feelings, sense data, senses, and of which the consciousness passively receives. On the other hand, Morphe (form) or Noetic aspect of consciousness has the task of making the sense of, or bestowing meaning on. The function of the noetic aspect of consciousness is to create unity in diversity, identity in difference, form in what is intrinsically formless, and, ultimately, to deliver stable, coherent, and intelligible intentional experience on the basis of sensory data that are themselves non-intentional and without meaning. (David Bell, Husserl. Great Britain: TJ Press Ltd, 1990. p.172).

Any parts or moments of a mental act in virtue of which that act is intentional, or in virtue of which it possesses a sense, Husserl calls ‘its noetic moments or noeses for short’ (Ideas 85/p.249); and the sense itself he calls the act’s noema. (Quoted from Ideas 90/p.261by David Bell, Husserl. Great Britain: TJ Press Ltd, 1990. p.173).

Thus, I use the ‘noetic moments’ of Husserl in order to relay my consciousness of meaning to the experience I had during my immersion with the Aetas. The intentionality of the act proceeds from the subject itself. And thus the subject term “I” indicates the first-person structure of experience. The verb then, describes the type of intentional activity of the subject such as perception, thought, imagination, etc.

Of central importance is the way that objects of awareness are presented or intended in our experiences, especially, the way we see or conceive or think about objects. The direct-object expression articulates the mode of presentation of the object in the experience: the content or meaning of the experience, the core of what Husserl called noema. In effect, the object-phrase expresses the noema of the act described, that is, to the extent that language has appropriate expressive power. The overall form of the given sentence articulates the basic form of intentionality in the experience: subject-act-content-object. (Phenomenology, Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Google/search)

Phenomenological researchers today face a rich diversity of empirical approaches from which to choose. There are many variants of using phenomenological researches. One of those is the heuristic researcher could well focus more intensely on the question: ‘What is my experience of feeling lost?’ While they might draw on a range of data from stories, poems, artwork, literature, journals, they would also look inward, attending to their own feelings/experiences by using a reflective diary. They would aim to produce a composite description and creative synthesis of the experience. (Introducing phenomenological research, By Linda Finlay. Google/search)

Using such concepts, methods and approaches, I may now start my ‘noetic moments’ with the Aetas in Brgy. Matag-ub, Janiuay, Iloilo.

˜™

What is the meaning of life despite of poverty? The focus of the immersion program of SJRS is primarily on the marginalized and poor people in the society. There are different sectors on which seminarians will be assigned, such as: fishing, farming, haciendas (sugarcane workers) and indigenous people. We’re given the opportunity to choose among those sectors, and I intentionally chose to be assigned among the indigenous people. I found it very exotic and adventurous. I was then imagining myself eating with ituk or komodo dragon, or joining with them in their pangayam or hunting trip on which the ayam or dog serves as guide to find the ituk, or strolling and selling silhig or brooms and kontra-usog na pulseras or amulets against evil spirits in the city plaza. However, I started then to feel nervous because some of the senior seminarians who had been there before told me that some of the Aetas were aswang or cannibals and that they are filthy and using strange cultures which seem to be marsian in our context. Well, whatever will be, will be as I thought. In fact, I wanted it much to be with them, not as an outsider or an inquirer but to know and understand them, to feel the way they feel and more importantly, to find the meaning of life despite of being marginalized in the society. By undergoing this process, I may give up my biases among them for I had lived with them for a month and a half as what they live. The immersion program is an opportunity for me to grow in my perspective of life and living with it to the fullest despite of the challenges that will eventually come in my way.

˜™

Everything was ready! I was told by my formator to go first to Fr. Cerilo “Caloy” Camus, head of the Committee for Indigenous People in Archdiocese of Jaro, for him to bring me to the area of my assignment and also to give me a short orientation regarding to what I will undergo through the immersion program. I brought with me one knapsack and a small shoulder bag. My formators reminded me not to bring many things and especially foods for the Aetas will might get intimidated. So, instead of having an immersion with them, they might ended having immersion to me. These were I got from the orientation with Fr. Caloy, that there are at least a minority of IPs (Indigenous People) in Panay Island. Such areas are to be found in Guimaras Province, Capiz, Calinog, Janiuay and some part of the Antique and Kalibo. I have known that one of the tribes in Calinog (Central Panay), the Bukidnon or locally called Suludlon, has their chieftain who being awarded by the NCIP (National Commission on Indigenous People) as a National Treasure for they actually preserved their heritage, particularly their languages, chants, amulets, dresses and dances. Well, I can sense that indeed Filipino culture is very rich and that made me animated.

We arrived in Brgy. Matag-ub, Janiuay late in the afternoon. We crossed a small river and then climbed up a valley. I saw rice fields and indeed it was a serene place. As we were approaching the village, I heard children’s boisterous laughter for they were playing near the chapel. We went to them, and asked somebody where we could find Kap Cornelio, the chieftain of the village. They said, he was in his house located at the top of the valley. Before I know it, we were already been watched by him, the chieftain. I was glad that he and Fr. Caloy were already friends and I thought this would be a great immersion for me for they already knew each other. Maybe a special privilege will be given to me. Fr. Caloy introduced me to Kap Cornelio Magbanua and likewise Kap Cornelio was happy to accept me as their guest. “You should not give him any special treatment. Just be with yourselves and treat him as one of your children. Whatever you eat, whatever you do or anything, do not hesitate to teach him. He will get accustomed to it easily.” Fr. Caloy told him and looked at me with a grin. I felt my stomach lurking as Fr. Caloy bid farewell to me. “What will I do now? Are they friendly?” these were the questions that I don’t know the answers yet. But I already set up my mind that these Aetas are good people for they were friends of Fr. Caloy.

˜™

What events which I consider significant during my immersion with the Aetas?

a. Pagpanghibyok (Making broomstick). One instance, I helped them in making broomsticks. And then, I tried to ask some questions with regard to pagpanghibyok. These were the information I gathered upon hearing their stories. They went to Karawdan, Janiuay, a 30-minute travel from the town of Janiuay. They went there by akupar of tricycle and they paid about P300 – P500, back and forth. Pagpanghibyok will last for a week in the middle of the forest. They took their shelter by making kamalig (small nipa huts), minimizing their food and taking care of themselves not to get sick. Hibyok is a plant having the resemblance of a coconut tree but with thorns all over its trunk. It grows beneath the edge of the mountain and so it is difficult to go near of it for the rocks are stiff and slippery. Expertise is really needed, and thus I may call them, experts. They could make hundreds of brooms within a week of pagpanghibyok. They sold the brooms ranges from P15 – P20 just enough to bring back their expenses from the fare and to buy some food, there was literally no profit at all.

b. Pagpangayam (Hunting). They went to the kagulangan or forest where they could find ituk (komodo dragon) and iru (wild cat). They went there by walking alone, bringing no food, no money, no water, just a bolo or knife. There was no assurance that every time they went for hunting, they could get some ituk or iru. These ituk and iru serve as their food. If they could not get one, tambo (bamboo shoots) serves as food. Actually, tambo is delicious but the ituk is quiet flat and it’s cold. Everytime we had ituk for dinner, they just cooked me some eggs and that serves as my viand. They just eat once a day, and that is, every 3:00 or 4:00 in the afternoon. There was no breakfast or lunch, only coffee in the morning and in noon time but sometimes, there was nothing at all. That’s how they lived, that’s how to be an Aeta.

c. Playing with the kids. There were a lot of idle hours. So instead of sitting for the whole day, doing nothing, I went with the children to the river banks to play hide and seek, or swim together with them and with carabaos, eat sugarcane, coconut, mangoes, and play basketball in the barrio. Some other time, I read pocketbooks and scribbled some poems. But these things were prohibited as being said during my orientation, for the Aetas might feel threaten to see me writing. They might feel that I was spying on them. But I cannot help but to write some poems and read pocketbooks. I even taught them to memorize some of my poems made and told them some of my stories. Somehow, they were enjoying my company.

d. Living together with them. The Aetas in Brgy. Matag-ub, Janiuay lived there for more than 50 years now. The land was owned by the Lacson’s and was under CARP (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program). They have given a share of the land, 10.5 hectares and were under trial for the title. The title for ancestral domain could be possible under the IPRA (Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997) but there was a problem and some complication due to the Uta or Bisaya (refers to the ordinary people not Aetas) staying in the land area. Why there were Bisaya in the area? They said, the Bisaya came from the other towns and went to Brgy. Matag-ub and asked the Aetas for a temporary land to cultivate with. The Aetas allowed them to use the land and to put up their houses but later on, the Bisaya did not want to give the land back from them but instead, they threatened to kill the Aetas. What else could the Aetas do? They were good in nature and very inferior among the Bisaya. So, they just left the land to the Bisaya and disturbed them no more.

I knew these things for together with Fr. Caloy and Kap Cornelio, we went to DAR (Department of Agrarian Reform) in Iloilo City, to report these matters. The Commission for Indigenous People of the Archdiocese of Jaro as well as the NCIP (National Commission on Indigenous People) are trying to help the village of Kap Cornelio until now. But then, on my part, I was so helpless for not doing anything. I cannot even confront the Bisaya living in the area to give back the land they did not own. They had no title or certificate to show that they were the owners either. This was I think my negative experience living with the Aetas and I felt bad with the Bisaya for using such power trying to intimidate those who are weak and marginalized.

˜™

SYNTHESIS

I saw no poor but poverty. Are these people poor because they lack the standard recommended daily allowance? Are these people poor because they have below minimum living wage? Are these people poor for they have no education?

“Yes, they are poor.” chorused by the social workers, common people, and maybe one of you here. But I may say to you, “They are not poor. We make them poor.” I think we are trying to put them in what we think or thought of, on what should proper or not, we put our minds on them, but on their behalf, they think differently. They are contented and they are happy. They consider themselves not poor for they can live within the minimum, that is, the necessary: food, shelter, clothing, nothing more and nothing less. How about, if they will put their minds on us, will they also say that we are rich?

They are the people known to us as the Aetas. We may also call them, the Indigenous People. For almost a month and a half, I lived with them, ate whatever they eat, and even felt what they feel. I have learned to love them. And I am proud of them.

There are things that, we, the Bisaya have differences. Particularly, in the way we see things in life. We see life and measure it by our success in business and education; by our properties and possessions; by our pride and glory. But, my dear friends, we have this inevitable connection between them, the IPs. A connection which links indestructibly both the Bisaya and the Aetas, that we are Filipinos! Our blood running in our veins is the same blood as theirs. They are our ancestors and we should be proud of them. If you feel ashamed because of who they are, you are also ashamed of who you are!

Poverty then is what I saw. Poverty is a form of oppression. Whether you are poor or rich, still you will experience poverty. These people, the IPs are being marginalized. They tried to live simply but they were oppressed and being subjected to any intimidations. The Bisaya are the ones who made their lives miserable. What if, we should just live them alone, try to understand them and be compassionate to them?

Now, who is poor between the Bisaya and the Aetas?

We destroy our forests and replacing them with factories and mining for the name of development and progress. And in return, we suffer much pollution and calamities. While the Aetas, they nurture the piece of land they own. For them, the land is the source of their living, and the land is their life.

We make such laws with regard contraceptions, family planning and more so on population control. As if we are care for the future or we are just afraid of so many responsibilities catered by big numbers? While them, they love their family. They are happy with many children. But still, inspite of big numbers, they can survive.

We usually get bored when doing nothing. It seems that life is so difficult when we have nothing to do. While them, they are just enjoying for doing nothing. They are so peaceful. No worries at all.

We look for delicious food and easily get irritated if we find dishes not on our own likes. We tend to be luxurious and extravagant, try to accumulate many things which actually not necessary. But the Aetas, they are being gracious for a little they have, an ituk or iru for dinner, a pandesal and coffee for breakfast or lunch, and even no snacks in the mid-morning or mid-afternoon. And yet, they are so thankful for the food they eat everyday.

We have so many problems and worries for the future. We are surrounded by our anxieties. We are in prison of our own ambitions. But the Aetas are free. We make them prisoner of our own imprisonment.

And so, my dear friends, I have just shared my own first-hand experience with the Aetas together with my own synthesis. This may either be right or wrong but somehow it does make sense, doesn’t it?

˜™

APPENDICES: I would like to share some of the poems which I made during my Immersion Program with the Aetas. I used languages such as: Hiligaynon, Tagalog, Kiniray-a and ‘Inati’ their own dialect. I also try to translate them into English, just bear with my rough translations.

I. Ano kaya kung? September 29, 2008 I. What if?

Sa mundong patungong kaunlaran, In a world towards progress,

Ano kaya kung kasama kapayapaan? What if together with peace?

Taong may kaya at masagana, Man with wealth and abundance,

Ano kaya kung magbigay din sila? What if they will also give?

Batang walang problema at masigla, Child with no worries and active,

Ano kaya kung pareho lahat sila? What if they are all the same?

Ako, taong maraming tanong, I am a man with many questions,

Ano kaya kung... ano kaya? What if... what if?