, PLS2607 Assignment 2 (COMPLETE ANSWERS) Semester
1 2025 - DUE 7 April 2025; 100% correct solutions and
explanations.
David Hume and the Logical Positivists hold a distinct position when it
comes to the nature of metaphysical claims and their place in
philosophical inquiry. Both Hume, in the 18th century, and the Logical
Positivists, in the early 20th century, exhibited skepticism toward
metaphysics, considering it to be a branch of philosophy that ultimately
failed to produce meaningful knowledge or reliable information about
the world. The statement by Hume that anything related to metaphysics
should be “cast into the flames” reveals a strong disapproval of
metaphysical speculation and indicates a fundamental difference in how
Hume and the Logical Positivists viewed philosophical inquiry. This
analysis will explore the reasons behind Hume's stance on metaphysics,
compare his views to those of the Logical Positivists, and demonstrate
how both groups shared a similar distaste for metaphysics due to their
emphasis on empirical evidence and the limits of human understanding.
Introduction: The Nature of Metaphysics and Its Discontents
Metaphysics, as a branch of philosophy, is concerned with questions
about the nature of reality that transcend immediate sensory experience.
It deals with issues such as the existence of God, the nature of the soul,
the structure of time and space, and the nature of causality. For
centuries, metaphysical speculation had been a central focus of many
philosophers, but its status as a reliable source of knowledge came into
question in the modern era. Philosophers like David Hume, a prominent
figure in the Scottish Enlightenment, and the Logical Positivists of the
early 20th century, such as members of the Vienna Circle, were deeply
critical of metaphysics. Hume’s statement in An Enquiry Concerning
Human Understanding (1748) that anything which hints at metaphysics
should be "cast into the flames" reflects his belief that such inquiries are
1 2025 - DUE 7 April 2025; 100% correct solutions and
explanations.
David Hume and the Logical Positivists hold a distinct position when it
comes to the nature of metaphysical claims and their place in
philosophical inquiry. Both Hume, in the 18th century, and the Logical
Positivists, in the early 20th century, exhibited skepticism toward
metaphysics, considering it to be a branch of philosophy that ultimately
failed to produce meaningful knowledge or reliable information about
the world. The statement by Hume that anything related to metaphysics
should be “cast into the flames” reveals a strong disapproval of
metaphysical speculation and indicates a fundamental difference in how
Hume and the Logical Positivists viewed philosophical inquiry. This
analysis will explore the reasons behind Hume's stance on metaphysics,
compare his views to those of the Logical Positivists, and demonstrate
how both groups shared a similar distaste for metaphysics due to their
emphasis on empirical evidence and the limits of human understanding.
Introduction: The Nature of Metaphysics and Its Discontents
Metaphysics, as a branch of philosophy, is concerned with questions
about the nature of reality that transcend immediate sensory experience.
It deals with issues such as the existence of God, the nature of the soul,
the structure of time and space, and the nature of causality. For
centuries, metaphysical speculation had been a central focus of many
philosophers, but its status as a reliable source of knowledge came into
question in the modern era. Philosophers like David Hume, a prominent
figure in the Scottish Enlightenment, and the Logical Positivists of the
early 20th century, such as members of the Vienna Circle, were deeply
critical of metaphysics. Hume’s statement in An Enquiry Concerning
Human Understanding (1748) that anything which hints at metaphysics
should be "cast into the flames" reflects his belief that such inquiries are
