This paper will first outline David Hume's argument in An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding against our having any idea of "power or necessary connection" between cause and effect. It will then discuss objections against this same account of causation brought up by G.J Warnock in his essay, "Hume on Causation." Lastly, it will conclude that Hume's account of causation is a sound one, despite Warnock's objections. .
David Hume's account of causation in An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding is based on Empiricism; that is that all knowledge acquired in life ultimately originates from our experiences. Hume provides two reasons supporting this claim. He first states that "when we analyze our thoughts or ideas, however compounded or sublime, we always find that they resolve themselves into such simple ideas as were copied from a precedent feeling or sentiment." (Hume,634) His second reason is supported by those with a defected organ. Hume points out, for instance, that a blind man is incapable of forming any notion of colors, just as it is impossible for a deaf man to form a notion of sounds. This supports the claim that we are incapable of gaining knowledge from any other source other than experience. .
Hume classifies all perceptions of the mind into two general categories, impressions and ideas. He defines impressions as "all our more lively perceptions, when we hear, or see, or feel, or love, or hate, or desire, or will." (Hume,634) Ideas are faint copies of these impressions, caused by one's reflection. Hume then asserts that "all objects of human reason or inquiry may naturally be divided into two kinds, relations of ideas, and matters of fact." (H,636) Relations of ideas include all types of Mathematics, such as geometry, algebra, and arithmetic. He argues that relations of ideas are a priori, independent of the existence of the universe. In contrary, matters of fact are not a priori, but arise solely from experience.