Hume’s Causal Reconstruction of the Perceptual Relativity Argument inTreatise1.4.4

Abstract

In Treatise 1.4.4, on behalf of modern philosophers, Hume described a causal argument that shows that our impressions of secondary qualities do not resemble qualities of objects themselves. However, in their respective arguments, Hume’s philosophical predecessors did not argue causally, but appealed to contrary qualities. I argue that Hume’s presentation was not simply a “gratuitous” stylistic difference, but an important correction of his predecessors in light of his own philosophical discoveries.

Molecular phylogenetics coupled with morphological analyses of Arctic and Antarctic strains place Chamaepinnularia (Bacillariophyta) within the Sellaphoraceae

“…1.4.4. (Rambaut 2009) and support values higher than 70% for ML and higher 96% for BI were noted on the branches. An additional ML phylogenetic tree was calculated with the same settings with sequences of additional seven strains (Supplementary material 2).…”