PLS2607
Assignment 1 Semester 1 2025
Detailed Solutions, References & Explanations
Unique number:
Due Date: 7 April 2025
HUME, LOGICAL POSITIVISM, AND THE REJECTION OF METAPHYSICS: A CRITICAL
PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS
1. INTRODUCTION
David Hume, an influential figure of the Scottish Enlightenment, famously declared that any
form of metaphysics hinting at entities or realities beyond sensory experience ought to “be
cast into the flames” (Hume, 2000:12). Although Hume wrote in the eighteenth century, his
arguments foreshadowed the more systematic stance taken by the Logical Positivists in the
early twentieth century. Both Hume and the Logical Positivists contended that statements
which cannot be grounded in sense experience or verifiable reasoning are effectively
meaningless. This essay explores Hume‟s criticisms of metaphysics, explains how the Logical
Positivists expanded upon these criticisms, and highlights both the strengths and weaknesses
of their arguments. By applying a dialectical method—presenting Hume‟s and the Positivists‟
“thesis,” examining potential “antithesis,” and seeking a concluding “synthesis”—the
discussion aims to illustrate why these philosophers viewed metaphysics with such Terms suspicion,
of use
By making
as well as acknowledge where their views might be challenged. use of this document you agree to:
Use this document as a guide for learning, comparison and reference purpose,
Terms of use
Not to duplicate, reproduce and/or misrepresent the contents of this document as your own work,
By making use of this document you agree to:
Use this document
Fully accept the consequences
solely as a guide forshould you plagiarise
learning, reference,or and
misuse this document.
comparison purposes,
Ensure originality of your own work, and fully accept the consequences should you plagiarise or misuse this document.
Comply .. with all relevant standards, guidelines, regulations, and legislation governing academic and written work.
Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is" without any express or
implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or liability for any actions taken based on the
information contained within this document. This document is intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes.
Reproduction, resale, or transmission of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
Assignment 1 Semester 1 2025
Detailed Solutions, References & Explanations
Unique number:
Due Date: 7 April 2025
HUME, LOGICAL POSITIVISM, AND THE REJECTION OF METAPHYSICS: A CRITICAL
PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS
1. INTRODUCTION
David Hume, an influential figure of the Scottish Enlightenment, famously declared that any
form of metaphysics hinting at entities or realities beyond sensory experience ought to “be
cast into the flames” (Hume, 2000:12). Although Hume wrote in the eighteenth century, his
arguments foreshadowed the more systematic stance taken by the Logical Positivists in the
early twentieth century. Both Hume and the Logical Positivists contended that statements
which cannot be grounded in sense experience or verifiable reasoning are effectively
meaningless. This essay explores Hume‟s criticisms of metaphysics, explains how the Logical
Positivists expanded upon these criticisms, and highlights both the strengths and weaknesses
of their arguments. By applying a dialectical method—presenting Hume‟s and the Positivists‟
“thesis,” examining potential “antithesis,” and seeking a concluding “synthesis”—the
discussion aims to illustrate why these philosophers viewed metaphysics with such Terms suspicion,
of use
By making
as well as acknowledge where their views might be challenged. use of this document you agree to:
Use this document as a guide for learning, comparison and reference purpose,
Terms of use
Not to duplicate, reproduce and/or misrepresent the contents of this document as your own work,
By making use of this document you agree to:
Use this document
Fully accept the consequences
solely as a guide forshould you plagiarise
learning, reference,or and
misuse this document.
comparison purposes,
Ensure originality of your own work, and fully accept the consequences should you plagiarise or misuse this document.
Comply .. with all relevant standards, guidelines, regulations, and legislation governing academic and written work.
Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is" without any express or
implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or liability for any actions taken based on the
information contained within this document. This document is intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes.
Reproduction, resale, or transmission of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
