David Hume and Policy Development

Discuss about the Ethics in Conflicts of Modernity.

Practical reasoning is implied to decide the process to act. It serves as a contrast to the theoretical reasoning that implies reasons to decide what to follow. Most of the philosophers consider practical reasoning as the determination of plan of action (MacIntyre, 2016, pp.106-109). I believe practical reasoning possesses law-abiding qualities because of its categorical imperative that gets bind to the duties of an individual rather than their subjective preferences. Reason and passion are the two elemental perspectives that stand in opposition to each other and as one chooses one, he gets pulled by the competing demands of the other (Gerken, 2014, pp.725-744). If I want to make a difference by achieving his full potential, I need to tightly integrate reason and passion. There is a relationship between reason and passion that can be understood from the constant struggle that I go through to balance them for existing peacefully which was not possible by his inherited character. Therefore, the abilities of practical reasoning of an individual are much controlled by my reasons and passions and their existing relationship in my philosophy. This assignment will discuss the applications of David Hume and Aristotle for understanding of the practical reasons in the field of study of sociology and anthropology.

David Hume, a Scottish essayist, economist, historian and philosopher had an approach for the understanding of practical reasoning which was not based on the philosophical context of motivation but was based on the understanding the people that provide reasons for their actions. He established a rational relationship between the reason and passion of people that explored the psychology of people for inferring the reasons for the actions of a person (Richardson, 2013, pp.356-361). It is obvious that the factors of psychology are not enough for explaining the reasons of a person by not entailing explanatory relevance for the actions of an individual driven by his reasons and passion. Hume claimed that actions and passions are responsive to reasons that are either in contrary or in agreement with the instrumental implications of the desires and passions. He also stated that the practical form of reasoning and inference do not exist (Kasavin, 2013, pp.27-30). He has appropriately implemented his claims in his economic thoughts where he put forward an empirical argument that was against the British mercantilism aiding to policy development through classic economics. Since sociology and anthropology talk about people and their governments, Hume’s theory of economic prosperity can be of utter importance in policy development as he stated that value judgments cannot be made purely based on the facts. Since passion and action are involved in practical reasoning either in contrary or agreement, facts alone cannot suffice the policy development initiatives (Perry, Bratman & Fischer, 2015, pp.220-223). Therefore, Hume’s claims and theories have useful application in the understanding of policy development with context to sociology and anthropology since reason here has to be a slave of passion. Without appropriate passion, policy development is not possible as it should include the culture and sentiments of the people apart from the reason for developing a policy.

Aristotle and Policy Development

To supplement this influential thought, the claims of Aristotle can be well implemented for understanding policy development. Aristotle, the Greek scientist and philosopher, have a remarkable influence on political developments through his theories of politics where he has compared the politicians with craftsmen (Sprute, 2015, pp. 154-156). This is an argumentative fact as politics is a form legislative science that incorporates practical knowledge and reasons whereas craft includes passion and productive knowledge. Aligning his thoughts with policy development, it can be stated that the developers should well consider what would be good to do where the actions will be a purview of the practical deliberations. Therefore, practical reasoning will form the base of the policies considering the welfare of the community which will be a balanced output of reason and passion. Aristotle and Hume have put forward their arguments by appropriately describing the understanding of policy development in the context of reason and passion and their underlying relationship. However, their arguments differed as for the point of their application and the principle of their claims that treated the facts with a unique approach.

Negotiation is another aspect of practical reasoning where David Hume has expressed his thoughts by stating that during a war, the weaker one negotiates. This has been proposed alternatively by Hume where he has stated that weaker one has the recourse to conquest the custom that they have acquired by the attribution of the ideas (Hume, 2012, pp.258-297). This statement reflects the fact that one idea can be helpful in reasoning that is concerned with the other ideas which are different from the original idea based on several circumstances. Negotiation comes into the play when structuring of the thought process is based on the consequences of the conflicting considerations. The soul has been referred to as a battlefield wherein the reason battles against the passion and this is the point where negotiation serves to bring equilibrium (Emerson, 2016, pp.155-158). This negotiation is very important in sociology and anthropology where, according to Hume, the weaker section of the community will have the recourse to conquest the custom with the aid of practical reasoning that can be beneficial to eliminate the pessimistic ideas in negative circumstances. In other words, the theory of Hume applies negotiation as a conflict management strategy that exists between reason and passion.

Defining negotiation on the lights of the rhetoric theory of Aristotle, it can be stated that negotiation can be used as a problem solving tool (Bell et al., 2013, pp. 109-111). From the perspectives of decision making, it is an agreement between two or more people for the allocation of the scarce resources. Although the theory of Hume is based on the application of negotiation as strategy for conflict management in negative circumstances, an argument can be generated with the theory of Aristotle wherein negotiation is a tool for decision making. From the both the perspectives, negotiation is utilized for the benefits of the community and its culture which forms the base of sociology and anthropology.

David Hume and Negotiation

Persuasion can be well explained from the argument of David Hume on practical reasoning where he made a challengeable and remarkable dictum. He stated that reason should be the slaves of the passions where passion and reason cannot make a human perform an action through his famous argument “slave of the passions” (Sagar, 2014, pp.615-638). He supported his argument with the statement that a person without passion will not have any reason for not doing or doing anything. Therefore, persuasion comes to play when a person needs to do or not to do an action. For doing this, it is important to share and understand the passion of the person and make him realize that by not doing or doing an activity, he can gain his passion and he will not be frustrated (Ayer & Winch, 2013, pp.291-294). This principle can be applied to sociology and anthropology as this field of study deals with consequences of human behavior and social cultures of human being. The reason of the people in a community do an activity can be driven by their passion that will have an effect on the private troubles and public issues based on their cultural backgrounds.

Aristotle had his views on persuasion based on the virtues of rhetoric which recognized the argument raised by Hume from a different perspective. Persuasion and its understanding as a practical reason are essential as a central political skill since it was stated by Aristotle that persuasion is important for the civilized political and social life through his quote “the faculty of observing, in any given case, the available means of persuasion” (Burnyeat, 2015, pp.126-127). Contrary to the argument of Hume, Aristotle defined persuasion as the practical understanding of ethical perspectives in relation to politics. Since politics is a part of the community that leads to the overall development of the people, therefore, the thoughts of Aristotle regarding persuasion is well applicable to this field of study. The social structure and culture of a community are largely based on its political development and here is the point where persuasion becomes important as it makes the politician take the right decision that is based on passion and adjudged by reason for the welfare of the community dwellers. 

David Hume had a substantial view for the methods of introducing change where he laid down the principle of change and that includes correction of the negligence in the previous reasoning with the present expression. He mentioned about this in his work ‘Essays and Treatise’ where he stated the experimental method of introducing change into the moral subjects. The demonstrative reasoning is not enough for bridging the gap between an existing policy and requirement for a change concerning matters of facts, probable reasoning and relations of ideas (Hume, 2012, pp.375-377). Therefore, Hume stated that just inference is essential for moving from the past to the future and so method of introducing change will require probable reasoning based on the principle of uniformity for connecting the past with the future. This view is applicable in sociology and anthropology due to the fact that this field of study includes social movements and social justice which requires introduction of changes for the sake of social reforms. Thoughts of Hume can be beneficial in laying down the methods of introducing change by interconnecting the existing social traditions with the future social transformation.

Aristotle and Negotiation

Aristotle drew an argument on the methods of introducing change by identifying change as a virtue of practical reasoning as he laid down a clear distinction between practical and theoretical reasoning. He stated change as a deliberation of thoughts and therefore, expressed practical reasoning in the form of deliberation. Aristotle stated the valuable reasoning of introducing change by stating that the method should be based on correct reasoning rather than only right desires alone (Gutas, 2014, p.234). This principle is applied in the field of sociology and anthropology because of the fact that the methods of introducing change can be devised by taking a closer look at the communal world and recognizing the needs for change that is justified by correct reasoning. The cultural aspects of human beings can be influenced by correct desire and reasoning which is crucial in determining the appropriate method of introducing change.

The philosophy of David Hume is remarkable for development due to their ability to inspire and provoke others, continuing vitality and revolutionary insights. He developed a science based on human nature that was based on careful arguments and observable facts that are crucial for the economic, political and social development. He placed the modules on social development at the center of the philosophical debates regarding the morality foundations based on the motivational psychology of reasons and passions (Box, 2014, p. 84). He stated that cognitive states and beliefs are important to be motivated for bringing about a new action, intention and desire that leads to development. This theory applies to the field of sociology and anthropology as belief and cognitive states are involved in the development of the community with the incorporation of the desire to develop. The cultural belief of the community sets the place for passion required to motivate the belief and cognitive states required for development.

Aristotle had a similar argument on development as he strongly recommended on balanced development of an individual with practical reasoning. He mentioned that developing a fuller understanding of what has to be achieved has the potential for a better life by involving implementation of reasons in thoughts and mastering the passions. Aristotle experienced that when passions conflict with reasons, development gets a halt and this can be overcome by making a reasoned choice that is influenced by passion in the process of deliberation (Schofield, 2013, pp.52-55). This theory is applicable in sociology and anthropology as combination of reason and passion is crucial for solving the problems of the community for the sake of development. The interaction of social, political, cultural and economic forces are required to be determined by the application of practical reasoning for modifying human behavior and bringing development.

In sociology and anthropology, the philosophy of both the philosophers David Hume and Aristotle is vital as they state that practical reasoning has a positive contribution in social sciences. It not only aids in promoting development by balancing reason with passion but also helps to identify the philosophical defects existing in the social, political, cultural and economic belief and cognitive states of the human beings. Sociology and anthropology are the practical fields of study that that are largely dependent on the theories of David Hume and Aristotle and are based on practical reasoning by reinforcing their pragmatic point of views.

References

Ayer, A. J., & Winch, R. (2013). British Empirical Philosophers (Routledge Revivals): Locke, Berkeley, Hume, Reid and JS Mill.[An Anthology]. Routledge, 291-294.

Bell, J., Crossley, N., Stephens, W. O., Sullivan, S., Leary, D., Watkins, M., … & Des Chene, D. (2013). A history of habit: From Aristotle to Bourdieu. Lexington Books, 109-111.

Box, M. A. (2014). The Suasive Art of David Hume. Princeton University Press, 84.

Burnyeat, M. F. (2015). Enthymeme: Aristotle on the logic of persuasion, 126-127.

Emerson, R. L. (2016). Essays on David Hume, Medical Men and the Scottish Enlightenment:’Industry, Knowledge and Humanity’. Routledge, 155-158.

Gerken, M. (2014). Same, same but different: the epistemic norms of assertion, action and practical reasoning. Philosophical Studies, 168(3), 725-744.

Gutas, D. (2014). Avicenna and the Aristotelian Tradition: Introduction to Reading Avicenna’s Philosophical Works. Including an Inventory of Avicenna’s Authentic Works. Brill, 234.

Hume, D. (2012). Emotions and moods. Organizational behavior, 258-297.

Hume, D. (2012). A treatise of human nature. Courier Corporation, 375-377.

Kasavin, I. (Ed.). (2013). David Hume and Contemporary Philosophy. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 27-30.

MacIntyre, A. (2016). Ethics in the Conflicts of Modernity: An Essay on Desire, Practical Reasoning, and Narrative, 106-109.

Perry, J., Bratman, M., & Fischer, J. M. (2015). Introduction to philosophy: Classical and contemporary readings, 220-223.

Richardson, H. S. (2013). Practical Reasoning. The International Encyclopedia of Ethics, 356-361.

Sagar, P. (2014). Minding the Gap: Bernard Williams and David Hume on Living an Ethical Life. Journal of Moral Philosophy, 11(5), 615-638.

Schofield, M. (Ed.). (2013). Aristotle, Plato and Pythagoreanism in the first century BC: new directions for philosophy. Cambridge University Press, 52-55.

Sprute, J. (2015). Aristotle and the Legitimacy of Rhetoric, 154-156.