| Hume’s questions include at least two aspects,one is the proof of the necessary connection between cause and effect,the other is the legitimacy of empirical reasoning,referred to as the question of causation and induction.As for Hume’s answer to the question of causation,on the one hand,unlike the interpretation of causal reductionism,I think that for Hume,causal necessity is similar to a metaphysical principle,not an empirical one.On the other hand,in contrast to the interpretation of causal realism,I think there isn’t enough evidence to suggest that Hume promises a really causal power,and in fact Hume takes a skeptical position on this issue.In short,Hume is a causal determinist,not a causal realist.As for Hume’s answer to the question of induction,it’s generally accepted that Hume denies the legitimacy of empirical reasoning and maintains that all knowledge about facts is probative.Once again,my article rejects this view.The premise of empirical reasoning is the uniformity of nature,which is an unquestionable belief in nature,so the premise of empirical reasoning is legitimate.Not only that,but there is a pre-established harmony between the causal reasoning that people following their habits make and the natural process,and therefore causal reasoning is legitimate.Correspondingly,there is at least one kind of knowledge about facts that has certainty,which Hume calls proof.As for Kant’s response to Hume’s questions,a popular view now holds that in the second analogy,Kant proved "every-eventsome-cause",but did not prove "same-cause-same-effect",that is,he did not prove the necessity of particular empirical laws.According to this,Kant aims to answer only the question of causation,not the question of induction.Kant does not answer the question of induction precisely because he agrees with Hume that empirical reasoning is illegitimate and that empirical knowledge is only probabilistic.This paper argues that Kant’s answer to the question of causation is that it is necessary,whether "every-eventsome-cause" or "same-cause-same-effect".The proof of "every-eventsome-cause" is based on the fact that we can distinguish between sequences of perceptions and sequences of events;The proof of "same-cause-sameeffect" is based on the notion of immutable ground in Kant’s pre-critical period.Kant’s answer to the question of induction is,the empirical judgment has strict universality,the law of gravitation can be known a priori,a kind of a priori means deduced,said the law of gravity can be known a priori,said is equal to the law of universal gravitation is not the result of induction,but the result of the deduction,is to deduce from the metaphysics principle of pure natural science,therefore,the knowledge of the special laws of causation can be legal.Finally,many scholars presume that Kant and Hume adopt the same causal model,and Kant’s response to Hume’s problem of causation is to contradict Hume’s position.On the contrary,this paper holds that Hume’s and Kant’s causal models are completely different,and they each provide solutions to the same problem based on different theoretical frameworks.Kant cannot refute Hume’s position because the basic presuppositions are different,and the conclusions of Kant and Hume are generally the same.Considering that Kant’s solution is more consistent than Hume’s,this paper holds that Kant’s solution is superior to Hume’s. |
