Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T22:57:00.682Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hume's Fundamental Problem of Evil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 July 2014

James Tarrant
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The problem of evil for theists was how to reconcile suffering with a benevolent God. Hume solved the problem of evil by claiming that the divine was amoral but not by denying God's existence which he needed in order to advocate his favoured notion of a general providence. Indeed, Hume's treatment of the problem of evil showed that his quarrel in the Natural History of Religion1and the Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding,2Section XI, was with a particular providence rather than the possibility of a divine orderer. The fundamental problem of evil for Hume, was evil's potential to drive people to the notion of a particular providence with its attendant damaging passions. In considering his alternative of the general providence Hume is shown to be closer to theism than has often been thought.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy , Volume 89 , Issue 4 , October 2014 , pp. 603 - 620
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Hume, D., Principal Writings on Religion including Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion and The Natural History of Religion (ed.) Gaskin, J.C.A., (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993/1757, 1779)Google Scholar, abbreviated NHR in the text.

2 Hume, D., Enquiries Concerning Human Understanding and Concerning The Principles of Morals (ed.) Selby-Bigge, L.A., rev. P.H. Nidditch (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975/1777)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, abbreviated EHU in the text.

3 I am grateful to Mr T. Miles for comments on an earlier version of this paper.

4 Ha, L. Tai, ‘Was Hume an Atheist? A Reconsideration’ Filozofia, 66 (2011), 240–257, 248Google Scholar.

5 Hume, D., Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (ed.) Smith, N.K., (Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1947/1779)Google Scholar, abbreviated DNR in the text.

6 Ibid., 199.

7 Ibid., 220.

8 Ibid., 201.

9 Ibid.

10 Ibid., 202.

11 Hereafter AFD.

12 Hume, EHU, op. cit. 142.

13 Hume, DNR, op. cit. 143.

14 Hume, EHU, op. cit. 140–141.

15 Hume, D., A Treatise of Human Nature, Book One (ed.) Macnabb, D. (Glasgow: Fontana/Collins, 1962/1739), 162–163Google Scholar.

16 Hume, D., ‘Of the Immortality of the Soul’, in (ed.) Miller, E.F., Essays Moral, Political and Literary (Indianapolis: Liberty Classics, 1987), 592Google Scholar.

17 Ibid.

18 Hume, EHU, op. cit. 141.

19 Ibid.

20 Hume, EHU, op. cit. 135.

21 Ibid., 140.

22 Hume, NHR, op. cit. 153. [My italics].

23 Ibid., 139.

24 Ibid., 176.

25 Hume, EHU, op. cit. 142.

26 Hume, DNR, op. cit. Intro. 23.

27 Hume, NHR, op. cit. 154.

28 Hume, ‘Of Superstition and Enthusiasm’, in (ed.) E.F. Miller, op. cit. 77.

29 Hume, DNR, op. cit. 220.

30 Hume, DNR, op. cit. 222.

31 Ibid., 154.

32 Hume, NHR, op. cit. 138.

33 Ibid., 150.

34 Hume, DNR, op. cit., 201–202.

35 Hume, Treatise, op. cit. 212.

36 Hume, EHU, op. cit. 19.

37 Ibid., 165.

38 Ibid.,144.

39 Hume, D., A Treatise of Human Nature, Books Two and Three (ed.) Ardal, P., (London: Fontana/Collins, 1972/1740), 57Google Scholar.

40 Hume, NHR, op. cit. 154.

41 Hume, ‘Of the Standard of Taste’, in (ed.) E.F. Miller, op. cit. 242.

42 Hume, NHR, op. cit. 153.

43 Hume, D., A Letter from a Gentleman to his Friend in Edinburgh (eds) Mossner, E.C. and Price, J.V. (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1967/1745)Google Scholar.

44 Ibid., 25

45 Hume, NHR, op. cit. 184.

46 Ibid., 178.

47 Ibid., 153.

48 Ibid., 160.

49 Ibid., 159.

50 Ibid., 154.

51 Hume, EHU, op. cit. 294.

52 Hume, DNR, op. cit. 215.

53 Hume, NHR, op. cit. 182.