Guillotine of Hume or the Problem of Morality in Religion
Guillotine of Hume or the Problem of Morality in Religion

Video: Guillotine of Hume or the Problem of Morality in Religion

Video: Guillotine of Hume or the Problem of Morality in Religion
Video: The Is-Ought Problem (David Hume) 2023, November

In 1739 the Scottish philosopher David Humeissued "A treatise on human nature."The ideas of the treatise became the basis for the further philosophy of Hume and his criticism of religion. In it, the philosopher formed the famous "Hume's guillotine"which has become a painful thorn in theology for theologians.

Hume criticized not only religion, but also human rationality, which was praised by the then materialistic philosophers-enlighteners. But atheist philosophers treated Hume as a great thinker and respected his position, and religious fanatics hated him, even wanted to desecrate Hume's grave, so for some time there was a guard next to her.

"Guillotine of Hume" is also called "Hume's principle" … This principle is formed on the basis of the reasoning of the Scottish philosopher about the nature of morality and being … Hume notes that all ethical systems are built on the idea that moral norms can be deduced from the world of facts. But this idea has no foundation. Why is it important?

Hume asks the question: how can notions of what should be deduced from the notion of existence? Hume's answer: no way. It is impossible to deduce any morality from ontology. Morality is purely human, subjective, having nothing to do with the objective world. How does this make God immoral?

There is a huge gap between morality and the observed world. Therefore, if believers can think that God really exists, then they cannot think what moral qualities this God possesses. All moral epithets in relation to God arise exclusively from the will of the believer; they have no logical connection with the supposed real God.

In this way, God is immoral, that is, outside of morality. The Bible, the Koran, the Vedas and other sacred books cannot be trusted, because they only declare morality, and do not prove it from what we perceive with our senses.

I once talked with a minister of the Russian Orthodox Church, he said that since God exists, he must necessarily be good, otherwise he would have no reason to create this world. But this position is erroneous, because God could have created the world from completely different motives. We cannot say that God must be good or must be evil. We will not have any reason to talk about his moral qualities at all, because what is due does not follow from existence.

The Sumerian gods created humans so that humans would become their slaves. Is the Abrahamic God the same?

David Hume wrote many works, which he devoted in whole or in part philosophy of religion: "Research on Human Cognition", "A Treatise on Human Nature, or Attempt to Apply an Experiential Method of Reasoning to Moral Subjects", "On the Immortality of the Soul", The Natural History of Religion, "On Superstition and Frenzy", "Dialogues on Natural Religion ".

Hume's criticism of religion is not connected with the philosopher's dislike of religion. Criticism is based solely on the logic and principles of human knowledge. For Hume, any idea of God and morality is spawn of reason, and not a consequence of sensory perception.

Hume viewed religion as an important factor for the existence of society. Based on this idea, he formed two imperatives for believers and non-believers, so that there would be no social unrest. Believers should be patient with rationalistic criticism of their religious views, while atheists should treat criticism of religion as a game of reason, and not use criticism as a means to suppress believers.