Question

"Necessity is something in the mind, not in the objects." Explain what this means and what Hume’s reasons were for holding it.

Answer 1

Answer:

Explained

Explanation:

Let me first make the opposite clear: there is a necessity in the item. For example, it is essential to try to turn an acorn into an oak. At that point the importance of snuffing it is in the downpour that suffocates it, or the heat that heats it, or the squirrel that is consuming it.

It's regarded as the "last" trigger that the acorn will do, as it can't resolutely try. Different causes are known as the "proficient" cause: "Evaporating it was the efficacy of the sun on the acorn," unlike what the sun would do to a heap of residue. It's dry right now, so the sun would just warm it up.

Hume agreed that we could confirm that, on the grounds that the movement of billiard balls on each other gives the mind the requirement of believing one ball pushes the other— bearing in mind that we have seen that we believe this impact— that since it occurs while we see it, we expect it and conclude that it will repeatedly do something very close.

In any case, he claims we trust it just because that's the way our psyches work, not because we can "demonstrate" any further that a billard ball hitting another is going to move it, but because our brains only act to make us accept we can really decide the cause.