Great Debate / The Humean Arguments

I would like to know how DominionSeraph analyzes this statement of Hume's. I offer him a great debate. (David Hume An Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding)I think it is fatally flawed because that statement does not contain any abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number. Nor does it contain any experimental reasoning concerning matter of fact and existence.How do we make a meaningful statement that is metaphysically stated, in order to tell us that metaphysics is meaningless?Obviously, and with his and your permission... the Great Debate Thread...

Rob,DominionSeraph has replied to your request for a debate here.You two can hash out the specifics in that thread. Then when you both agree that you want to debate the topic, let me know and I'll move the final OP to the Great Debate Thread.Reminder, do not debate the topic in that thread.Thanks
AdminPD

on why your GD proposal appears to be going nowhere1: You quoted a paragraph from Hume. That paragraph criticizes volumes (complete books or dissertations). Hume never intended that as a criticism of a paragraph. You apparently want to say that Hume's paragraph is self-refuting. But since it was not intended to apply to individual paragraphs, this won't make for a persuasive argument.2: Hume presumably was expressing what he took to be a matter of fact, yet another reason why your critism is not persuasive.3: Hume bases this criticism on his own epistemology (theory of knowledge). Most current philosophers do not accept Hume's epistemology. DominionSeraph has made it clear that he does not want to defend a principle that is not part of current thinking.

---

Rob,DominionSeraph does not wish to engage in a Great Debate on this topic.I will leave the details of how you wish to proceed up to you and AdminNWR.

Nwr, my apologies... I didn't pay enough attention to what your post had said until now. I thought it was a simple acknowledgement of the failure of the issue to develope between DominionSeraph and myself. You know... a basic form letter from the 'admins'. I see now that it is developing with a different debater at the helm.Do you wish to discuss this nwr? I would be honored to be given the opportunity to present my critique of what it is you have said. If so, how shall we proceed? A Great Debate?

At present, there is no clear topic to debate.

As you wish.