Character Clues
Character Analysis
Thoughts and Opinions
Are you kidding? This whole Enquiry is about Hume's thoughts and opinions. This doesn't mean that Hume just decides to offload whatever's going on in his head. This isn't a rant or a meandering journey with no real direction. Hume tells us exactly what he thinks and isn't scared to take on and challenge existing opinions. If he ever feels any doubt or confusion, he lets us in on this too. He's a pretty upfront guy.
This piece hinges on Hume's belief that morality is based on sentiment and reason rather than reason alone. His whole basis for writing it is his opinion that some other philosophers have done more harm than good. He doesn't get into a YouTube-style comments war with individual philosophers (though it's kind of funny to picture him yelling "why are you people hating on sentiment?!!"), but he feels that both ancient and moral philosophers haven't always made much sense.
As well as the whole reason/sentiment thing, Hume argues that some virtues are natural while others are social; i.e., they've been created because they serve a purpose. Justice is the main virtue of this kind, and Hume stresses that it's necessary and useful.
Hume certainly doesn't hold back when it comes to "monkish virtues" like fasting and self-denial. He's at his most opinionated here and doesn't toy with the idea that these things could be useful or agreeable.
We can tell that Hume doesn't suffer fools gladly. At one point, he notes that someone who's seriously lacking in dignity, understanding, or good financial sense can't be called virtuous, and that anyone who says otherwise is "an egregious blockhead" (IV.2). Erm, we've never used that expression ourselves, but we're thinking it's not a good thing.
Hume's big on the idea of people working together for the good of all, and he doesn't have much sympathy for people who are greedy, scheming, or impulsive. He thinks it's far better to think of the future than to waste money, give in to temptation, or throw others under the bus for our own sake. You know when someone's described as "firm but fair"? This is a description that we could probably apply to Hume.
Social Status
Hume's under no illusion that we live in a world of perfect harmony. Talking about inequality throughout history, Hume notes:
The great superiority of civilized Europeans above barbarous Indians, tempted us to imagine ourselves on the same footing with regard to them, and made us throw off all restraints of justice, and even of humanity, in our treatment of them. (III.I.4)
As well as race and nationality, Hume discusses inequality between the sexes. He remarks that women are reduced to slavery in many nations, though they've managed to achieve rights and privileges in some places. Thinking about his own culture, Hume has noticed that chastity is demanded of women but not of men. He doesn't get into the gender politics here but he makes it clear that men are more easily forgiven for their mistakes, whereas for women, it's one strike and you're out. Social justice? Quick, someone alert Tumblr!
Hume goes on to imagine what would happen if the world were populated by not just us but creatures that were much weaker in body and mind. Would we treat them equally? Hume doesn't think so. He muses:
Our intercourse with them could not be called society, which supposes a degree of equality; but absolute command on the one side, and servile obedience on the other. Whatever we covet, they must instantly resign […] Our compassion and kindness the only check, by which they curb our lawless will. (III.I.18)
By using this example, Hume gives us a fictional scenario in which justice and property laws aren't needed. He explains:
As no inconvenience ever results from the exercise of a power, so firmly established in nature, the restraints of justice and property, being totally USELESS, would never have place in so unequal a confederacy. (III.I.18)
In reality, however, justice systems and property laws are needed. Hume's point is that, without them, there'd be no sense of public order and people would sometimes be at one another's throats.
Hume suggests that, though we can feel envy toward a person who's wealthy and successful, we feel respect and humility as well. At the other end of the spectrum, folks who are living in poverty can provoke feelings of pity but also contempt (it depends—if they've brought on their own misfortune, we're not gonna be brimming with sympathy).
Hume observes that different signs of success are valued in England than in most countries of Europe. He explains that, in these countries, "hereditary riches, marked with titles and symbols from the sovereign, is the chief source of distinction. In England, more regard is paid to present opulence" (VI.II.13). This contrast backs up Hume's point that different things can be valued depending on the time/place.
For all this talk of success and prosperity, Hume emphasizes that a person's character is what's most important. We may compliment someone on the stuff they own, as riches are "the most convenient, being the most fixed and determinate, source of distinction"; however, our "internal sentiments are more regulated by the personal characters of men, than by the accidental and capricious favours of fortune" (VI.II.12). In short, someone's personality is more important than their class or their bank balance. Mother Teresa would definitely approve.
Physical Appearances
Ideas about utility and agreeableness don't just apply to emotions and behavior—they apply to physical appearance, too. Hume's concern isn't so much with the latest fashion trends or hair colors. It's more a case of being healthy and full of life (okay, so this is sounding kind of like a shampoo commercial).
Because Hume believes we have a natural sense of sympathy, it follows that images of health transmit a sense of wellbeing. Hume explains it like this:
Easy and unconstrained postures and motions are always beautiful: An air of health and vigour is agreeable [...] In every judgement of beauty, the feelings of the person affected enter into consideration, and communicate to the spectator similar touches of pain or pleasure. (V.II.23)
As well as general good health, it's ideal for someone to be physically fit for the life they lead and work they do. This can depend on the time and place. Hume points out:
In ancient times, bodily strength and dexterity, being of greater use and importance in war, was also much more esteemed and valued, than at present [...] historians scruple not to mention force of body among the other accomplishments even of Epaminondas, whom they acknowledge to be the greatest hero, statesman, and general of all the Greeks. (VI.II.4)
We can see that these ancient warriors were a force to be reckoned with, both because of their skill and their physical strength (just check out the legend that is Hercules). The same kind of thing applies in some sports today, like boxing.
Even if being brawny isn't important, being agile and fit is always a benefit. As Hume sums up:
Broad shoulders, a lank belly, firm joints, taper legs; all these are beautiful in our species, because signs of force and vigour. Ideas of utility and its contrary, though they do not entirely determine what is handsome or deformed, are evidently the source of a considerable part of approbation or dislike. (VI.II.3)