Hume's proposal of cause and effect seems to be the most evident out of the methods of knowledge (induction, deduction, cause & effect) in our world today. By taking the three philosophers' methods of knowledge that we previously studied and applying it today's world, you can see where there the faults and strengths of the three lie.
in today's oil crisis, Descartes would use his method of deduction and deduce that we have to rely on bio-fuels, solar, wind, and nuclear power because that is all that is available today.
Locke's induction method, would employ logical reasoning and suggest that we immediately cut back on fuel consumption and increase production of ethanol. He may even suggest funding research for alternative energy.
However, with Hume's cause and effect method we have seen that cutting back on fuel consumption and increasing the production of ethanol has had practically no effect on gas prices due to speculators and maxed out refineries. There was no way to see that this particular case would go against the golden rule of business (supply and demand), until it had already happened. Also, no one forsaw the global food crisis arising due to the increase of biofuels and decrease of food production, yet again something only apparent in a cause and effect relationship.
Out of the three i think Hume had the most proven method (induction and cause & effect) although the others have their points as well.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment