Hume -existent Vs. Non-existent

1 Pages 234 Words

Nothing that is distinctly conceivable implies a contradiction. Whatever we conceive as existent, we can also conceive as non-existent. …
In this claim made by Hume, nothing is distinctly conceivable implies a contradiction, implies whatever exists must have cause and in this case if that something is distinctly conceivable it has cause and it does not imply a contradiction. The example of the “bachelor” states that all bachelors are unmarried. This is self-contradictory and is contrary. To say that some bachelors are married implies/is a contradiction of saying all bachelors are married because either you are married or not and if you are married you can not be a bachelor. Therefore, the example of the bachelors is demonstrable. It does not show a valid deductive argument.
The claim to say that “whatever we conceive as existent, we can conceive as non-existent.” would be thought to be seen as grounds against Hume’s claim that God’s existence is not demonstrable, but he justifies this claim by taking imaginative inductions. For example, dogs exist is true but on the contrary the idea that dogs do not exist is conceivable. We can imagine the world without dogs and even though this may be true, it is not a truth that is demonstrable. God’s existence is such that its contrary is not self-contradictory and no contradiction is implied and therefore God exists....