David Hume Necessary Connection
Hume has already established that complex ideas can be broken down to simple ideas which are copies of impressions, or things we perceive. He categorizes “power” and “necessary connection” as complex ideas; this means we must trace back what simple ideas they come from and then what impressions those simple ideas come from. But Hume argues that there is no impression where the idea of necessary connection can come from. He first uses the examples of the billiard balls. He says, “…we are never able, in a single instance, to discover any power or necessary connexion; any quality which binds the effect to the cause…” (Hume). We are not able to sense why the first billiard ball moves the second billiard ball when it hits it. We just see it happen but cannot sense the connection between the first one’s movements and the second one’s movements.
…show more content…
We are aware of the fact that we are able to move our body to do what we want, but there is a limit. He points out that we can move our limbs, but cannot “will” our heart or liver to move. He also points out that its not the actual limb that we are moving, it is the nerves and muscles that are doing it, but we still cannot sense how it happens or what causes it. Lastly, he points out how there are limits to what the mind can do or control. We know these limits through experience. This means we are only learning through the “conjunction of objects” (Hume), not through the “connexion” (Hume). This helps prove his argument that we cannot have experience of power or necessary
We are aware of the fact that we are able to move our body to do what we want, but there is a limit. He points out that we can move our limbs, but cannot “will” our heart or liver to move. He also points out that its not the actual limb that we are moving, it is the nerves and muscles that are doing it, but we still cannot sense how it happens or what causes it. Lastly, he points out how there are limits to what the mind can do or control. We know these limits through experience. This means we are only learning through the “conjunction of objects” (Hume), not through the “connexion” (Hume). This helps prove his argument that we cannot have experience of power or necessary