The first objective is , in a sense , more than satisfied , because Miller gives us a very concise version of Hume’s epistemology and ethics and social philosophy. His version is not always concise , because his understanding of the book leads to some repetition. The book consists of two parts , entitled ” judgment” and “action” , and a number of topics , such as Hume on human nature, the passions and motives , so make processed twice, once when entering the moral judgment , and yet as explanations and reasons for actions . One of the great things about the book is an attempt to take the moral and political judgment link behalf Hume formation of faith, and one of the main theses of Miller is that Hume has a very general theory of judgment as distinctive mental operation . In an effort to create a uniform interpretation of the epistemology and moral philosophy give Miller is quite successful . These attempts , since Kemp Smith , was rare , but now they seem to become fashionable . Both ethics , politics and epistemology of Aryeh Botwinick : a study in the unity of thought of Hume (1980 ) and David Hume , David Fate Norton , Moralht Common Sense and skeptical Melaphysican (1982 ) have similar goals and produce accounts of what unites the thought Hume in these areas. Miller says that ” Hume achievement is to have shown that both empirical and moral judgments depend on the ” internal frame and constitution ” of the human animal ” ( p. 59 ) and illustrates the theory of judgment at work in moral philosophy . When Miller is still in Part I , the artificial virtues , the emphasis on the judgment , as opposed to the reasons for the action , is more discreet. He states that ” the main feature of the theory of judgment is attacking Hume ‘s on rationalism and its replacement by a naturalistic position ” ( p. 95) and shows quite convincing , as others , such as DD Raphael also that both Hume in his general account of artifice and its ot specific processing devices , wants an alternative to an account of the natural law provide . But that is a decision ot account and the reason for the action is less clearly demonstrated. Curiously , Miller presents the proceedings of all Hume some devices , except the sections on promises , and chastity and modesty , two places where the strain of anti – natural law is particularly important. Of course Miller explains the rejection of a contract theory of government Hume , but it is not in a positive account of what promises and contracts Hume ‘ s , and where they are needed . By way of introduction keep < > 1 Millers social philosophy of Hume , on the whole, a shortened version of the lucid Luine Kemp Smith expanded to more essays and stories to cover account. It differs from J. I – . Recent book concise H new moral theory Mackie both by using the H istory of England , and in his attempt to link social philosophy to epistemology . Miller did not like Mackie . tracing the intellectual influences on Hume . It explicitly rejects this , but these references at the bottom of the page as it gives a wide range of influences that Mackie considers Montesquieu and Mandeville , the Scottish moralists and fellow Scots law . Another great virtue into Miller’s coverage of the economic scene , and social policy in Britain , where Hume responded. ( For me , Chapter 8, “Politics in Britain , ” was the most valuable , perhaps because I ‘m a newbie here . ) Although this attention to the current political controversies , and the use of history in social philosophy show in England the application , Miller’s book invites comparison with the book much heavier Duncan Forbes , Hume’s philosophical Policy . Besides the fact that Forbes is a wealth of information about likely influences the differences are mainly in the brevity and clarity of the story of Miller and not to differences in interpretation. According to Miller . goals Hume in the history of the first were ” a slap though Whig traditional ideologies Lory strike , revealing the fragility of the historical foundations on which it rested, and secondly , to intervene in the debate between the Court and the country , investigating the mechanisms that have kept the British constitution in balance ( p. 157) . Miller shows how these goals “fit ” with a view ” philosophy ” of Hume , and also trying to isolate the ideology of philosophy position of Hume . it is here that I have problems and those assumptions that the whole structure of the book and the underlying title in doubt. I conclude by indicating what those problems are . ” Philosophy , ” Hume Miller seems to use that term can be found in his ‘ second order ‘ views on the formation of human faith and judgment , BTIT “ideology ” in his ” first order ” moral assumptions and empirical , especially on ” how vaccination have , individually and collectively , instead of [ .. ] The way they think or judge “( p. 15 ) . Thus, treatment of ideology in the second part of the book , entitled ” Action” , and not in the first part of the book , entitled ” judgment” . ( Ideological Assumptions Hume prove to be a strange mixture of ” conservative ” and ” liberal ” , a conclusion that Miller revises its highest over-emphasis on social justice , on Hume as an advocate of a hierarchical society. ) But it’s hard to see why the non – critical assumptions should only appear in views on how people behave , not how they think, feel , and the judge , and the view of the road they are the best , rather than have views on how they think and best judge . In his treatment of Hume ‘s vision of the judgment , Miller points out that the attack on rationalism , does not mean that there is no possibility ol correct or improve beliefs and judgments , but says little about the Humean standards that improvement is measured , and he does not know why ” ideology ” could not get in as much as anywhere else . If a flume assumptions ‘ ideological ‘ show in his views about and assessing the motivations and behavior , and as Hume judgment on Miller’s own version of it, should be based on the passions , motivations and expectations , where the judgment contains and its correction will also ideologically tainted .
Miller can not be successful in his second and third goals , and even setting these targets may cause some confusion , or at least some very anti – Humean assumptions about the relationship between religious belief, empirical and practical , and thought leads to action . Yet grateful for the Miller book , not only as a useful introduction to Hume ‘s thought , but as a stimulating contribution to the interpretation of these take more attention than most performers .