Abstract
In 1929 Husserl wrote that Hume’s real greatness was still unrecognised in its most important aspect. Now I believe that the contribution to Hume studies by Husserl — as conveyed by Jean Laporte in France and Kemp Smith in Britain — and by his pupil Reinach, have gone a long way towards changing this state of affairs, because of a new way of reading Hume’s Treatise that they introduced. I first set out Husserl’s early views on Hume and then turn to Reinach’s paper on Hume, which builds on this work, but also goes a long way beyond it and isolates the most important aspect of Hume’s achievement.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Sir William Hamilton, Discussions on Philosophy and Literature, second edition, 1853, 90.
G. Frege, Posthumous Writings, translated by P. Long and R. White, Oxford 1975, 70–71; quoted by Michael Dummett Frege — Philosophy of Language, London: Duckworth, 1973, 158.
Dummett ibid., xxiv.
A. Meinong “Hume-Studien I. Zur Geschichte und Kritik des modernen Nominalismus” (first publication 1877), in A. Meinong’s Gesamtausgabe Graz: Akademische Druck- u. Verlagsanstalt, Band I (1969), 1–72. “Hume-Studien II. Zur Relationstheorie” (First publication 1882), in A. Meinong’s Gesamtausgabe, Band II, (1971), 1–172. English translation in Kenneth Barber, Meinong’s Hume Studies: Translation and Commentary, 1966. This contains: “Hume Studies I. On the history and criticism of modern nominalism”, 98–192, which is a complete translation of Meinong 1877; “Hume Studies II. The Theory of Relations”, which is an incomplete translation of Meinong 1882.
Meinong 1969,60.
E. Husserl Logical Investigations, (- LI) Vols. I and II, translated by J.N. Findlay, London: Routledge, 1970. Page references are to Vol. I of this edition.
David Hume A Treatise of Human Nature, edited by L.A. Selby-Bigge, revised by P. H. Nidditch, Oxford, 1978, Book I, Part 5, Section V. Page references are to this edition.
Sir W. Hamilton, “The Philosophy of Perception” in Hamilton 1853, 86–99.
Hume Treatise, Book I, Part 2, Section V, 56, lines 27–35.
A. Reinach, “Kants Auffassung des Humeschen Problems” in Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philosophische Kritik, 141, 1911, 176–209. Also in GS, 1–35. English translation by J. N. Mohanty, “Kant’s Interpretation of Hume’s Problem” in Southwestern Journal of Philosophy, 7,1976,161–188.
Footnote to Treatise Book I, Part 1, Section VII, which is contained in the Appendix to the Treatise, 637.
Ibidem.
Treatise, Book I, Part 3, Section I, 69, 70.
E. Husserl, “Adolf Reinach”, in Kant-Studien, 23, 1919, 147–149.
E. Husserl, Erste Philosophie, Husserliana VII, 352.
C.V. Salmon, “The Central Problem of David Hume’s Philosophy — An Essay towards a Phenomenological Interpretation of the First Book of the Treatise of Human Nature” in Jahrbuch für Philosophie und phänomenologische Forschung, Vol. X, 1929, 299–449.
In a conversation with Professor Kneale who had spoken with Husserl about the ‘hochbegabte Salmon’.
C. Maund, Hume’s Theory of Knowledge, London, 1932.
N. Kemp-Smith, The Philosophy of David Hume, London 1941, 266.
Salmon 1929, 334.
Revue Philosophique, 79, 1954, 352–399.
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1987 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Davie, G. (1987). Husserl and Reinach on Hume’s “Treatise”. In: Mulligan, K. (eds) Speech Act and Sachverhalt. Primary Sources in Phenomenology, vol 1. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3521-1_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3521-1_12
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-8073-6
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-3521-1
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive