hrcak mascot   Srce   HID

Preliminary communication

Hume’s Alleged Success over Hutcheson

Noriaki Iwasa   ORCID icon orcid.org/0000-0003-2467-5988 ; University of Tokushima, Center for General Education, Tokushima, Tokushima, Japan

Fulltext: english, pdf (388 KB) pages 323-336 downloads: 395* cite
APA 6th Edition
Iwasa, N. (2011). Hume’s Alleged Success over Hutcheson. Synthesis philosophica, 26 (2), 323-336. Retrieved from https://hrcak.srce.hr/82557
MLA 8th Edition
Iwasa, Noriaki. "Hume’s Alleged Success over Hutcheson." Synthesis philosophica, vol. 26, no. 2, 2011, pp. 323-336. https://hrcak.srce.hr/82557. Accessed 15 Oct. 2019.
Chicago 17th Edition
Iwasa, Noriaki. "Hume’s Alleged Success over Hutcheson." Synthesis philosophica 26, no. 2 (2011): 323-336. https://hrcak.srce.hr/82557
Harvard
Iwasa, N. (2011). 'Hume’s Alleged Success over Hutcheson', Synthesis philosophica, 26(2), pp. 323-336. Available at: https://hrcak.srce.hr/82557 (Accessed 15 October 2019)
Vancouver
Iwasa N. Hume’s Alleged Success over Hutcheson. Synthesis philosophica [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2019 October 15];26(2):323-336. Available from: https://hrcak.srce.hr/82557
IEEE
N. Iwasa, "Hume’s Alleged Success over Hutcheson", Synthesis philosophica, vol.26, no. 2, pp. 323-336, 2011. [Online]. Available: https://hrcak.srce.hr/82557. [Accessed: 15 October 2019]

Abstracts
David Hume thinks that human affections are naturally partial, while Francis Hutcheson holds that humans originally have disinterested benevolence. Michael Gill argues that Hume’s moral theory succeeds over Hutcheson’s because the former severs the link between explaining and justifying morality. According to Gill, Hutcheson is wrong to assume that our original nature should be the basis of morality. Gill’s understanding of Hutcheson’s theory does not fully represent it, since for Hutcheson self-love and self-interest under certain conditions are permissible, or even desirable or necessary for the good of society. There is not much difference between Hutcheson’s and Hume’s theories in the sense that they both extract impartial morality from human character as it is. Hume’s theory does not succeed over Hutcheson’s because Hume does not propose a better way of extracting morality nor explain all moral phenomena.

Keywords
Francis Hutcheson; David Hume; Michael B. Gill; ethics; human nature; impartiality; benevolence; partiality; self-interest; self-love

Hrčak ID: 82557

URI
https://hrcak.srce.hr/82557

[croatian] [french] [german]

Visits: 843 *