#concept-pamphlet #todo: flesh, finish
Ideas are all derivative of… >> …impressions and other ideas
Notes
- Our thoughts are bounded by our previous thoughts
- Ideas and impressions
- Ideas are all derivative of impressions and other ideas. Neural net lol
The idea of God, as meaning an infinitely intelligent, wise, and good Being, arises from reflecting on the operations of our own mind, and augmenting, without limit, those qualities of goodness and wisdom. We may pros- ecute this enquiry to what length we please; where we shall always find, that every idea which we examine is copied from a similar impression.
( I find the experience being dependent on sense to be true but…limited examples…overly simplistic. So many more senses
I find philosophy way too picky about examples…so many edge cases )
Taken to the extreme….mind is entirely product of environment entering body bc those are impressions and then ideas come from impressioms
It seems like Hume believes that there are two types of philosophy, there’s the simple and humane, and then there’s the accurate and abstract, and the common understanding is that it makes sense to have a combination of both in an individual’s thoughts. You don’t want to be a fool who completely disregards the accurate and abstract, but you also don’t want to be a person too caught up in the abstract that is not able to spend time socially with others, do tasks, thrive. Common sense says that it’s better to have a mix of both.
The pros of the easy philosophy are that it’s more durable. You can kind of enjoy the life of action and doing things and business and spending time with people. The cons are inaccuracy
The pros of the accurate philosophy is that it’s more precise and you need each other because the most beautiful works come from accuracy. The cons are that it’s easy to get into a rabbit hole founded on false claims.
It seems like Hume is getting at, oh, popular culture versus, oh, this smaller group of thinkers and what they believe. But he believes that science is, in this case, that small group of thinkers, abstract thinkers that are, is more accurate. Now, I mean, I think he’s right, but others may not, and this seems like a question of the majority versus the minority at the end of the day.
I do believe in hume’s time he was doing a lot of observation based assumptions from direct human senses. Lots of his ideas are based on premises/axioms that are outdated; with broad strokes resemble the shape of truth we have today but shaky details. E.g. diff streams being audio, voice. All thoughts being a result of combinations of stimuli. Impressions aka direct sense experiences vs thoughts aka composite replaya
IV