will take the next step and conclude that only he himself exists. "I know only myself, he might say(to himself; of course)."The world is the fabrication of my imagination. Therefore, only I exist. Such a solipsistic position has been held by few thinkers and by no major philosophers. (It was a solipsist, we are told, who, in deep anger, once said to a companion, "I'm going to kill you! "Whereupon he thrust a dagger into his own heart, and the other man ceased to exist.) HUME: WE MUST ALL BE SKEPTICS 12 To be is to be perceived"--esse est percipi--Berkeley contended How can we know anything exists if we can't perceive it? The world of real objects is beyond perception; they exist only as images in our minds, and these images might just as well derive from a Divine Mind as from some hypothetica substance"we conjure up in our fantasy That's where we stood with berkeley. Now David Hume sets his incisive intellect to work. First, Hume pointed out the obvious: the idea of God, like"matter, "is merely assumption. The one is no more known to us than the other. We know only our experiences, and it follows that we know nothing of God or matter. If matter is "make-believe" then so is god Berkeley never escaped Hume's net. God was the preferable assumption for the Irish cleric, but philosophers, Hume would contend, cannot live by assumptions alone. He accords with Locke and berkeley that we do not experience matter directly Therefore, Hume--with a passion for accuracy--never denies the existence of the real world (how could you deny the existence of something you can' t know? ) He remains in a suspended state of agnosticism. We can t know the real world, and there's no more to be said about it Next, Hume takes the heart out of science by undermining our belief in causality We never observe "causes. " Our concept of causality results from a habit of association. When events occur together repeatedly, we learn to assoc iate them; then we fabricate the"belief"that there is a necessary connection between events. But Hume points out, we observe neither cause nor necessity. " All our reasonings concerning cause and effect are derived from nothing but custom. "Causality has no objective status, so far as we know, it is only a mental habit without logical support Then Hume wonders about"mind What we call the"mind"is merely "a bundle or collection of different perceptions. It is a mov ie screen on which the senses, our jectors, project their pictures But there is no entity such as"mind", for when the projections are turned off there is nothing.(This does seem to happen when we turn off all our sense-projectors and sleep, during periods of deep, dreamless sleep our sense of"self"or"identity ceases to ex In his quest for logical consistency, Hume becomes our most extreme skeptic Where, then, do our sense experiences come from? In truth, we cannot know Their ultimate cause is perfectly inexplicable by human reason, and 'twill be impossible to decide with certainty whether they exist immediately from the object or are produced by the creative power of the mind, or are derived from the author of our being What can we know for sure? Nothing. David hume makes mincemeat ofwill take the next step and conclude that only he himself exists. "I know only myse1f," he might say (to himself; of course). "The wor1d is the fabrication of my imagination. Therefore, only I exist." Such a solipsistic position has been held by few thinkers and by no major philosophers. (It was a solipsist, we are told, who, in deep anger, once said to a companion, "I'm going to kill you!" Whereupon he thrust a dagger into his own heart, and the other man ceased to exist... ) HUME :WE MUST ALL BE SKEPTICS l2 "To be is to be perceived"--esse est percipi--Berkeley contended How can we know anything exists if we can't perceive it? The world of real objects is beyond perception; they exist only as images in our minds, and these images might just as wel1 derive from a Divine Mind as from some hypothetica1 "substance" we conjure up in our fantasy. That's where we stood with Berkeley. Now David Hume sets his incisive intellect to work. First, Hume pointed out the obvious: the idea of God, like "matter," is merely assumption. The one is no more known to us than the other. We know only our experiences, and it follows that we know nothing of God or matter. If matter is "make--believe" then so is God. Berkeley never escaped Hume's net. God was the preferab1e assumption for the Irish c1eric, but philosophers, Hume would contend, cannot 1ive by assumptions alone. He accords with Locke and Berkeley that we do not experience matter directly. Therefore, Hume--with a passion for accuracy—never denies the existence of the real world (how could you deny the existence of something you can't know?). He remains in a suspended state of agnosticism. We can't know the real world, and there's no more to be said about it. Next, Hume takes the heart out of science by undermining our belief in causality. We never observe "causes." Our concept of causality resu1ts from a habit of association. When events occur together repeatedly, we learn to associate them; then we fabricate the "belief" that there is a necessary connection between events. But, Hume points out, we observe neither cause nor necessity. "All our reasonings concerning cause and effect are derived from nothing but custom." Causality has no objective status, so far as we know; it is only a mental habit without logical support. Then Hume wonders about "mind." What we call the "mind" is merely "a bundle or collection of different perceptions." It is a movie screen on which the senses, our image-projectors, project their pictures. But there is no entity such as "mind"; for when the projections are turned off there is nothing. (This does seem to happen when we turn off all our sense--projectors and sleep, during periods of deep, dreamless sleep our sense of "self" or "identity" ceases to exist.) In his quest for logical consistency, Hume becomes our most extreme skeptic. Where, then, do our sense experiences come from? In truth, we cannot know. “Their ultimate cause is perfectly inexplicable by human reason, and 'twill be impossib1e to decide with certainty whether they exist immediately from the object, or are produced by the creative power of the mind, or are derived from the author of our being. What can we know for sure? Nothing. David Hume makes mincemeat of