/lit/ - Literature

>I am apt to suspect the Negroes to be naturally inferior to the Whites. There never was a civilized nation of any other complexion than white, nor even any individual eminent either in action or speculation. No ingenious manufacturer amongst them, no arts, no sciences. On the other hand, the most rude and barbarous of the Whites, such as the ancient German, the present Tartars, still have something eminent about them, in their valor, form of government, or some other particular. Such a uniform and constant difference could not happen in so many countries and ages, if nature had not made an original distinction betwixt these breeds of men. Not to mention our colonies, there are Negro slaves dispersed all over Europe, of whom none ever discovered any symptoms of ingenuity; though low people, without education, will start up amongst us, and distinguish themselves in every profession. In Jamaica, indeed, they talk of one Negro as a man of parts and learning; but it is likely he is admired for slender accomplishments, like a parrot who speaks a few words plainly.

I haven't heard too many attack Hume--yet.
>I am apt to suspect the Negroes to be naturally inferior to the Whites. There never was a civilized nation of any other complexion than white, nor even any individual eminent either in action or speculation. No ingenious manufacturer amongst them, no arts, no sciences. On the other hand, the most rude and barbarous of the Whites, such as the ancient German, the present Tartars, still have something eminent about them, in their valor, form of government, or some other particular. Such a uniform and constant difference could not happen in so many countries and ages, if nature had not made an original distinction betwixt these breeds of men. Not to mention our colonies, there are Negro slaves dispersed all over Europe, of whom none ever discovered any symptoms of ingenuity; though low people, without education, will start up amongst us, and distinguish themselves in every profession. In Jamaica, indeed, they talk of one Negro as a man of parts and learning; but it is likely he is admired for slender accomplishments, like a parrot who speaks a few words plainly.
David Hume, “Part I, Essay XXI: Of National Characters,” The Philosophical Works of David Hume, Including all the Essays, and Exhibiting the More Important Alterations and Corrections in the Successive Editions Published by the Author: Essays, Moral, Political, and Literary, vol. 3, Edinburgh/Boston, Adam and Charles Black/Little, Brown and Company, 1854, 217–236; 228–229.

>>13533165
>I am apt to suspect the Negroes to be naturally inferior to the Whites. There never was a civilized nation of any other complexion than white, nor even any individual eminent either in action or speculation. No ingenious manufacturer amongst them, no arts, no sciences. On the other hand, the most rude and barbarous of the Whites, such as the ancient German, the present Tartars, still have something eminent about them, in their valor, form of government, or some other particular. Such a uniform and constant difference could not happen in so many countries and ages, if nature had not made an original distinction betwixt these breeds of men. Not to mention our colonies, there are Negro slaves dispersed all over Europe, of whom none ever discovered any symptoms of ingenuity; though low people, without education, will start up amongst us, and distinguish themselves in every profession. In Jamaica, indeed, they talk of one Negro as a man of parts and learning; but it is likely he is admired for slender accomplishments, like a parrot who speaks a few words plainly.
David Hume, “Part I, Essay XXI: Of National Characters,” The Philosophical Works of David Hume, Including all the Essays, and Exhibiting the More Important Alterations and Corrections in the Successive Editions Published by the Author: Essays, Moral, Political, and Literary, vol. 3, Edinburgh/Boston, Adam and Charles Black/Little, Brown and Company, 1854, 217–236; 228–229.

>>13358560
>>13358553
>>13358498
>>13358464
>>13358461
STOP THIS NONSENSE AT ONCE

Why Hume didn't burned to death?
He made A treatise of Human nature.

Like, If Spinoza had officially published the Ethics in his lifetime, he would have been burned to death. Definitely.

>"He... he is theist! he still believed in god!'
But Spinoza too! Spinoza also believed in god!
this is the truth; it doesn't matter whether you believe god or not when it comes to burning someone!
Hume didn't believe in miracles, It doesn't matter it contains Lazarus or not, why nobody burned hume?

>"there's some time gap between two, that's the difference"
I thought this is the answer, but it doesn't seem that convincing.
it is 63 years.
I mean, it is something, but not that a lot; 64 years ago from today Nabokov made Lolita. What happened to it since then? it is something, but not that much.
If this can apply to today, then what does it happened to Hume?

>"He is not that radical compared to Spinoza"
But... is it though?
this would be matter of opinion but Hume is definitely radical; radical enough to compete Spinoza.
In my opinion Is-ought problem is harsher than Spinoza's view.
and It is the Hume who waken up Kant's dogmatic slumber.

So What happened? Pope suddenly lost the balls?

Why Hume didn't burned to death?
He made A treatise of Human nature.

Like, If Spinoza had officially published the Ethics in his lifetime, he would have been burned to death. Definitely.

>"He... he is theist! he still believed in god!'
But Spinoza too! Spinoza also believed in god!
this is the truth; it doesn't matter whether you believe god or not when it comes to burning someone!
Hume didn't believe in miracles, It doesn't matter it contains Lazarus or not, why nobody burned hume?

>"there's some time gap between two, that's the difference"
I thought this is the answer, but it doesn't seem that convincing.
it is 63 years.
I mean, it is something, but not that a lot; 64 years ago from today Nabokov made Lolita. What happened to it since then? it is something, but not that much.
If this can apply to today, then what does it happened to Hume?

>"He is not that radical compared to Spinoza"
But... is it though?
this would be matter of opinion but Hume is definitely radical; radical enough to compete Spinoza.
In my opinion Is-ought problem is harsher than Spinoza's view.
and It is the Hume who waked up Kant's dogmatic slumber.

Hahahahahahahaha How The Fuck Is First Cause Real Hahahaha Nigga Just Stop Believing In Causality Like Nigga Where Is The Necessary Connection Haha