{"title":"Hume beyond Theism and Atheism","authors":"Ariel Peckel","doi":"10.1353/hms.2024.a924228","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Abstract:</p><p>This paper defends a rigorous reading of Hume’s critiques of arguments for the existence of God and of the belief in God against interpretations that endorse Humean theism, deism, and fideism. The latter include Donald Livingston’s theist reading, J. C. A. Gaskin’s “attenuated deism” reading, and Edward Kanterian’s “humble fideism” reading. I also examine whether Hume’s rejections of a positive theology commit him to agnosticism or atheism. My innovative challenge to such conclusions maintains that, while elements of both agnosticism and atheism are found in Hume, these denote, respectively, a methodology and an incidental implication of his philosophy. But neither sufficiently captures his constructive vision for a society, individual psychology, and system of knowledge guided by naturalist principles and aims. For this, an alternate conception is needed that describes Hume’s philosophy of religion beyond mere atheism.</p></p>","PeriodicalId":29761,"journal":{"name":"Hume Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hume Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/hms.2024.a924228","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract:
This paper defends a rigorous reading of Hume’s critiques of arguments for the existence of God and of the belief in God against interpretations that endorse Humean theism, deism, and fideism. The latter include Donald Livingston’s theist reading, J. C. A. Gaskin’s “attenuated deism” reading, and Edward Kanterian’s “humble fideism” reading. I also examine whether Hume’s rejections of a positive theology commit him to agnosticism or atheism. My innovative challenge to such conclusions maintains that, while elements of both agnosticism and atheism are found in Hume, these denote, respectively, a methodology and an incidental implication of his philosophy. But neither sufficiently captures his constructive vision for a society, individual psychology, and system of knowledge guided by naturalist principles and aims. For this, an alternate conception is needed that describes Hume’s philosophy of religion beyond mere atheism.
摘要:本文针对赞同休谟的有神论、神论和信仰论的解释,对休谟关于上帝存在和上帝信仰论证的批判进行了严谨的解读。后者包括唐纳德-利文斯顿(Donald Livingston)的有神论解读、J. C. A. 加斯金(J. C. A. Gaskin)的 "衰减的神论 "解读以及爱德华-坎特里安(Edward Kanterian)的 "谦卑的信仰论 "解读。我还研究了休谟对实在神学的拒绝是否使他陷入了不可知论或无神论。我对这种结论提出了创新性的质疑,我认为,虽然不可知论和无神论的元素都存在于休谟身上,但它们分别代表了他的哲学方法论和附带含义。但二者都不能充分体现他对以自然主义原则和目标为指导的社会、个人心理和知识体系的建设性构想。为此,我们需要另一种概念来描述休谟的宗教哲学,而不仅仅是无神论。