Kant vs. Hume: A Comparison of 18th-Century Philosophies
Kant vs. Hume: Philosophical Differences
Epistemology
Immanuel Kant and David Hume, both 18th-century philosophers, differed significantly in their epistemologies. Hume, an empiricist, believed knowledge stems from sensory experiences and memories thereof. He categorized these as “Matters of Fact,” providing probable, contingent understanding. Hume also acknowledged knowledge derived from relations between ideas (e.g., mathematics, logic). Consequently, he denied the possibility of metaphysics and universal scientific knowledge, questioning even cause and substance. Kant, conversely, posited that knowledge requires both formal (subjective structures) and empirical (objective information) conditions. He argued that the knowing subject’s categories shape the knowledge of the object. For Kant, scientific judgments are synthetic (providing new information) a priori (universal and necessary). He believed that through sensibility (perception in space and time) and understanding (thinking and categorization), science becomes possible. While Kant also rejected metaphysics as knowledge, he acknowledged its inherent human appeal. Unlike Hume, he accepted causality as a category of understanding. From a Kantian perspective, Hume’s focus on sensory experience lacked the reflective nature of understanding, thus falling short of true knowledge.
Phenomena and Noumena
Both philosophers addressed phenomena, but with differing views. Hume argued that not knowing the essence of things renders science absurd. Kant, however, believed that perceived phenomena can constitute knowledge, even without knowing the essence of objects (noumena).
Concept of Man
Hume’s skepticism led him to doubt even the self, viewing the soul as a bundle of ideas and memories. Kant, on the other hand, saw humans as both phenomena (physical beings) and noumena (moral and free). He described man’s “unsocial sociability,” driven by animality (selfish survival instincts) yet capable of ethical and social behavior through humanity and personality.
Ethics
Hume advocated moral emotivism, where feelings and emotions guide moral choices. Kant, conversely, championed a rational, duty-based ethic guided by categorical imperatives. He criticized emotivism as selfish, arguing that actions should align with reason and duty, not passions.
Political Theory
Hume, influenced by utilitarianism, favored political systems maximizing happiness for the greatest number. Kant advocated republicanism (representation and separation of powers), rejecting despotism. He would accept utilitarianism only if it led to a republican constitution, rejecting direct democracy or other forms of despotism as threats to freedom and equality. Hume’s political philosophy allowed for various systems, while Kant insisted on a republican constitution aimed at perpetual peace within a society of nations.