Criticisms of Hume

1. Criticisms of Hume

2. Classification of Virtues • Yesterday we looked at Hume’s two types of virtue (Utility and agreeability). Hume believed these could be either virtues to ourselves or to other. • Here is an example of some examples of the virtues classified according to Hume’s principle

3. 1. Do you agree with Hume’s classification of the virtues? 2. Do you think we still recognise and value all the virtues on this list? Why/why not? 3. Are there any virtues that you think could be added to this list?

4. Criticisms of Hume’s Ethics • The account of morality that Hume gives is based on a kind of empirical investigative approach – he even says that he is adopting an ‘experimental method’ • He thinks that by taking examples of dispositions that we all agree are valuable and then by analysing these qualities to see what they have in common we are engaging in a science of ethics • But is this really a science?

5. Ethics and Science • A science in its most basic form is generally thought to consist of evidence gathering and constructing hypothesis based on this evidence, then testing the hypothesis against new pieces of evidence • But the virtues that Hume has identified do not appear to be based on any concrete evidence in the sense that we now understand it (e.g. qualitative research questionnaires from a sample of representative people)

6. Universality • Hume seems to think that we would all agree that the qualities he picks out are universally valued • So for Hume morality is common to all humankind, and by definition a moral virtue is a disposition approved of by everyone • But is this so?

7. No Universality • For many of these qualities Hume seems to be describing what he and his peers value, rather than virtues that are universally valued • If this is so then Hume’s investigation must be limited to his own historical era and possibly his own social class

8. Optimism • Hume seems optimistic in thinking that vicious, non-virtuous people will always be disproved of by majority of people • The sensible knave now seems to be the default position for many people • At the more extreme end of non-virtuousness, we need only look to the history of genocide in the past hundred years to find out how frequently non-virtuous behaviour becomes normal amongst a majority, thus enabling a group systematically to kill those who fall outside of it

9. Assumption • A further criticism is that it appears as if Hume is already assuming what he is setting out to prove • Hume wishes to know what principle of morals we follow • In order to do this he examines qualities that we admire • His conclusion is that these qualities are based on utility or agreeability. This is his principle of morals. But when faced with a counter-example (e.g. Poverty, obedience, humility [what Hume calls ‘monkish values’] he dismisses them because they are not useful (or agreeable)

10. However, if he is sincere in his empirical approach then he should try to understand why so many people do value these qualities • These qualities are counter-examples that go against his original principle of utility, and so either Hume must amend his principle or say why they are not genuine counter-examples • Because he dismisses them outright, he must already be assuming that his principle is correct, even before his investigation has begun, which is hardly in the spirit of empiricism