Causation: Hume’s Concern and Kant’s Response
Department
Arts, Languages, and Philosophy
Major
Physics; Philosophy
Research Advisor
Dittmer, Joel P.
Advisor's Department
Arts, Languages, and Philosophy
Abstract
If event A occurs then event B will follow. Is causation really that simple? Causation exists only if it is the case that certain events actually cause others. David Hume questioned the assumption of causation in his work A Treatise of Human Nature. This rocked the world of philosophy from its core teachings. Of course, a great question deserves a great response. Immanuel Kant attempted such an answer. Kant argued that a cause necessarily leads to the effect. This is in direct opposition to Hume’s argument that cause probably leads to the effect observed. An example would be of a child jumping into a still pool of water. One would expect that there would be some sort of disturbance of the water. Is this presumption a valid conclusion given the initial conditions? Kant argues that not only does the surface become disturbed, but that it must.
Biography
Nelson is a senior in physics and philosophy. Upon completion of his degree, he plans to attend medical school. In his spare time, he is a tennis instructor.
Research Category
Arts and Humanities
Presentation Type
Oral Presentation
Document Type
Presentation
Award
Arts and humanities oral presentation, First place
Location
Meramec Room
Presentation Date
15 Apr 2015, 9:30 am - 10:00 am
Causation: Hume’s Concern and Kant’s Response
Meramec Room
If event A occurs then event B will follow. Is causation really that simple? Causation exists only if it is the case that certain events actually cause others. David Hume questioned the assumption of causation in his work A Treatise of Human Nature. This rocked the world of philosophy from its core teachings. Of course, a great question deserves a great response. Immanuel Kant attempted such an answer. Kant argued that a cause necessarily leads to the effect. This is in direct opposition to Hume’s argument that cause probably leads to the effect observed. An example would be of a child jumping into a still pool of water. One would expect that there would be some sort of disturbance of the water. Is this presumption a valid conclusion given the initial conditions? Kant argues that not only does the surface become disturbed, but that it must.
