Quote:
Originally Posted by mce
Dude, if Richard Hume can prove that CAUSATION is an illusion then pretty much the theory you mentioned is good to go
|
You mean David Hume - an Empiricist. His argument wasn't that causation didn't exist, but that it was a defect in man's intellect to link two separate events as one causing the other based merely on repeated observations. Just because we see a correlation in the past 99 events, the next event is separate and our expectations of it should not be influenced by the previous events.
Interesting philosophy and something we would be well served to think about whenever we start making assumptions of correlation and causation.
Funny thing. I always confuse Hume with Jeremy Bentham (Utilitarianism), who had his corpse stuffed and put on display. I hear Hume, and I'm like - oh yeah, he had himself stuffed. No, wait...
I'd love to go back and re-read my philosophy books, but who's got the time?