Second Argument for the Thesis

Hume's next argument is based on the consequences of being deprived of the use of some sense organ. [text]


Premise 1: If a person has always had totally defective sense organs (e.g. is blind or deaf from birth), then that person does not have the corresponding kinds of ideas (e.g. colors or sounds). [text] [critique]

Premise 2: Someone who is blind or deaf from birth does not have any impressions of colors or sounds. (This is not directly stated, but is taken for granted.) [critique]

Premise 3: If such a person (described in premise 1) is cured, then the person does come to have the previously absent ideas. [text] [critique]

Premise 4: If a person has healthy sense organs, then that person does have the appropriate impressions. (Again, this is taken for granted in the passage.) [critique]

Premise 5: If a person has never experienced some sensory object (such as wine), then that person does not have the corresponding idea (e.g., the taste, of wine). [text] [critique]

Premise 6: If a person has never felt cruelty, then that person has no idea of cruelty. [text] [critique]

Therefore: [flow] [Critique]

Thesis