Hume’s Account of Causation
Question 6
The causation philosophy builds on the successive relationship that exists between the simultaneous actions where the initial one is depicted to affect the occurring of the other. Hume declares that two events that can be denoted by X and Y when they have a relationship where the initial one affects the other, it can be established that the two events are constantly conjoined. Hence, it can be found that the relationship established between the two events reveals that the Ys are affected by Xs; therefore, they tend to follow them and not the other way.
It can also be deduced from the relationship between Xs and Ys that the connection that exists between them is necessary. Necessary indicates that whenever Xs occur, Ys must follow. The constant connection among the events, according to Hume, results in the development of the problem of induction. Therefore, in the account of induction complexity developed, it is right to establish that humans are not reasonable justified to develop inductive thoughts towards the world. In this case, the philosophy extends association with the concepts that Hume developed in expounding on the relation between the two events where the first affects the occurring of the other. For instance, a clear picture of such activities as the burning of something that causes smoke. Smoke cannot jeopardize the occurring of the burning action (Beebee, 2009). Consequently, it can be revealed that Hume’s concepts in the causation philosophy are categorized into two; causal radicalizes and causal skeptic. It can also be deducted from the account of causation, cause and effect are portrayed to be not necessarily real or true. Hence, the causation effect is a philosophy that seeks to establish the relationship between things that lack mutual connection but have a successive occurrence.
Hume attempts to argue against the occurrence of miracles in the modern world. He depicts that the existence of the events of miracles does not adhere to the rules of nature. Therefore, they can be perceived as a violation of nature hence, thus developing on the impossibility associated with their occurrence. Furthermore, he believes that individuals ought not to believe in the occurrence of the miracles as it cannot be justified. The account on causation develops on the conjoined connection between events where the initial affect the occurrence of the succeeding one (Beebee, 2006). Therefore, the fact that Home does not believe in the occurrence of miracles can be connected to the joint relationship between two events. In this case, the miracle occurs without having the effect that is developed from the other event. Therefore, Hume is worth to declare that the relationship between the two is persuasive.
Consequently, it can be indicated that the induction problem that arises from the connection of the occurrence of two events does not exist in the case of miracles. The relationship between the events reveals the laws of nature that are apparent. It can also be indicated that miracles fail to portray the law of nature. The violation between the occurrence of the two events questions the existence of the miracles without being affected by the elements of cause and effect (Psillos, 2014). Hence, it can be established that Hume’s argument is persuasive in terms of the account of causation. The examples that have been portrayed through the occurrence of Ys and Xs build on the significance of cause and effect. Hence, the argument against miracles reveals the concepts developed in the account of causation.