Superb piece by Julian Baggini (writer and founding editor of The Philosophers’ Magazine).
He revisits the legacy of David Hume and tells us two things. First, despite his insights why Hume is not considered in the league of say Socrates or Kant. Second, why his thoughts and ideas matter even more today:
In his own lifetime Hume’s reputation was mainly as a historian. His career as a philosopher started rather inauspiciously. His first precocious attempt at setting out his comprehensive new system of philosophy, A Treatise of Human Nature (1739-40), published when he was 26, ‘fell dead-born from the press, without reaching such distinction as even to excite a murmur among the zealots’, as he later recalled, with self-deprecating exaggeration.
Over time, however, his standing has grown to the highest level. A few years ago, thousands of academic philosophers were asked which non-living philosopher they most identified with. Hume came a clear first…
View original post 991 more words
Recent Comments