Hume

     David Hume furthers naturalism and further the evisceration of supernaturalism that Carneades and others started. We naturalist are furthering that vital work. Hume notes that religions must give real evidence for miracles; purse say so and no  rigorous investigation are no,no's! That is not begging the question. No warrant exists,Alvin Plantinga notwithstanding, for any believer to  believe without evidence. His notion of an innate disposition does not conform to our conservation of knowledge,
Believers have the burden of proof as it is they who propose something not in evidence. We naturalists don't  have that responsibility,because we deal with what exists. Supernaturalists must use the presumption of naturalism, of which Hume's demand for evidence for miracles, is a corollary.
 Hume, proposes,along with Thomas Hobbes, what I call wide reflective subjectivism- the overcoming of our mere wishes and whims by our considered judgments. We might want to go to a party, but our judgment overrides, telling us to study. We might want to commit vengeance, but our judgment tells us to get the police  to do their job.Thus, this form of subjectivism upholds morality and is rooted in our moral sense and which by the consequences of actions on people,other animals and the environment is objective: the paradox then is that a form of subjectivism underpins objective morality, I find!
  What do you opine about Hume or what I maintain? Ket us have a spirited,enlightening conversation!

Hume- the magnificent naturalist!

David Hume insists that one uses the empirical method- use facts- rather than unfounded intuitions, religious traditions, revelations and holy books.  In this manner, people lead themselves to that more abundant life, Those others are non-starters, parasites on the presumption of empiricism!
 The presumption of naturalism requires that we acknowledge that not only are causes and explanations necessary and efficient, they are also primary and sufficient; Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz notwithstanding, they themselves are the sufficient reason. They are that Necessary Being as it were1
 Hume and Immanuel Kant remain the top philosophers to keel haul supernaturalist arguments,albeit Kant himself has the ridiculous moral one. Carneades, a pre-Socratic one, keel hauls supernaturalism, and all others are his expanded footnote!
 Before Hume's devastating attack on teleological arguments, Carneades in response to Chrysippus  notes that the latter begs the question of the word builder in his analogy of the builder of houses with the more than human one of the Universe.The neutral verb form is forms.Why presume that homes and the universe are comparable.
 And as Hume brings up the problem  of evil, Carneades inquires what would the about to be grilled pig think of the greater good defense?
Hume use the dysteleological argument - from imperfections- in eviscerating teleological arguments.
 Richard Swinburne and William Lane Craig, notwithstanding, we find no personal explanation in any supernaturalist argument for His existence. Is it an incompetent God, a committee of gods, a manner like vegetation or some other manner. Otherwise one begs the question and uses the argument from ignorance.
  To the viewers of this blog, please respond yea or nay in part or in whole at whatever length  you so desire. It is for serious inquirers. As a fallibilist, I must admit that we naturalists can err!

David Hume- atheologian- naturalist

David Hume is the hero of us humanists and naturalists. He eviscerates somewhat supernaturalism as Carneades does. He deals in reality against those poseurs of the silly supercilious superstition of religion. He advocates compatibilism. And his and Thomas Hobbes's wide-reflective subjectivism underpin objective morality- that paradox!
 Notwithstanding the many who claim that he begs the question against miracles, no, he sure doesn't. That is his corollary to the presumption of naturalism that demands evidence for claims of knowledge.