Abstract

IT IS A REMARKABLE TRIBUTE TO HUME that of all past philosophical views, his critique of causality is nearly unique in being considered as true today as when he first proposed it over two centuries ago. Arthur Fine, for example, states, "I think we ought to follow Hume's prescription on induction with regard to the external world," while Quine flatly claims that "the Humean predicament is the human predicament." Despite the glaring fact that Hume's skepticism was induced by the severe limitations of scientific knowledge and the paucity of causal explanations at the time, most philosophers continue to believe that his analysis of causality conforms to our present level of scientific understanding. Yet just a glance at the difference in scientific knowledge should rattle that presumption.