David Hume: The Limits of Causal Knowledge and Skepticism

David Hume: Can Causal Knowledge Be Proven True?

According to Hume, all knowledge that transcends immediate experience is based on the existence of causal relationships. Crucially, this relationship can only be established through experience. Causal connection is not a product of the mind relating ideas; therefore, it is neither intuitively nor demonstratively certain.

Is Causal Knowledge Intuitively True?

The mind does not perceive any causal relationship intuitively. Furthermore, causal knowledge cannot be intuitively true because its opposite implies no logical contradiction.

Is Causal Knowledge Demonstratively True?

Arguments attempting to prove causality are often flawed:

• First Argument: It is claimed that everything must have a cause, as something occurring without a cause would imply it existed before it existed, which is impossible.
• Second Argument: It is argued that anything produced without a cause is due to "nothing," and nothing cannot be a cause.

Criticism of Demonstrations

These arguments often assume what they intend to prove. A third argument suggests that every effect must have a cause because it is inherent in the very idea of an "effect." However, the conceptual interrelationship between cause and effect does not prove that causes and effects exist in reality.

Knowledge of Facts and Experience

Causal knowledge is entirely dependent on experience. This leads to an apparent contradiction:

• We cannot claim knowledge is necessarily or probably true without falling into a regressus ad infinitum.
• Hume claims causal inference is justified when established between impressions, but not when moving beyond them.

Consequently, Hume has been criticized as a skeptic who cannot establish a degree of closeness to the truth, as the probability of observed cases approaching a universal truth may mathematically approach zero.

The Psychological Solution

Hume suggests that probability should not be understood in quantitative terms, but in qualitative terms. The awareness provided by experience is psychological in nature—a protective instinct based on habit and custom.

The Final Problem

How can we justify the ongoing match between our expectations (based on psychological conviction) and our perceived experiences? Hume offers no definitive answer. This lack of resolution provided the impetus for later philosophers, such as Kant, to attempt to overcome this skepticism.