Building Religion through Dialogue: David Hume in Conversation with Twentieth-Century Philosophy of Dialogue

Valeria Dessy

doi:10.3390/rel13030210

Abstract

The final part of David Hume’s Dialogues concerning Natural Religion has often left Hume’s readers perplexed. After a long and articulate debate between Philo, the skeptic, and Cleanthes, the theistic philosopher, the reader would expect the victory of Philo, whom many considered to be Hume’s spokesperson. Surprisingly, the book ends with the victory of Cleanthes. Keith Yandell suggested that none of these personages represented Hume, and that Philo’s change of mind was a “change of perspective”, epistemologically grounded in the concept of “propensities”, which Hume presented in The Natural History of Religion. In this article, I build on Yandell’s analysis and explore the dialogical dynamic of Hume’s work with the use of the twentieth-century philosophy of dialogue. I first focus on Michael Bakhtin’s analysis of Fyodor Dostoevsky’s books and show that, as in Bakhtin’s analysis, Hume does not orient the plurality of voices based on a pre-made understanding of reality. I then bring Hume into conversation with Martin Buber, especially regarding their epistemological standpoint. The aim of the article is to show the relevance of Hume’s thought for our contemporary philosophy of dialogue.

Highlights

This article brings David Hume’s Dialogues concerning Natural Religion (Hume andSmith 1947)1 into conversation with contemporary perspectives on the philosophy of dialogue, especially those of Michael Bakhtin and Martin Buber
In the course of the Dialogues, Hume touched upon several topics that are relevant for contemporary philosophy of religion: religious skepticism, religious tolerance, and freedom of thought
As I hope to have shown, twentieth-century philosophy of dialogue presents many interesting aspects that could be used as tools to provide a deeper and nuanced interpretation of Hume’s philosophy of religion without betraying Hume’s ironic spirit and critical thinking

Summary

Introduction

This article brings David Hume’s Dialogues concerning Natural Religion (Hume and. Smith 1947) into conversation with contemporary perspectives on the philosophy of dialogue, especially those of Michael Bakhtin and Martin Buber. Hume considered dialogue to be the most apt literary form to discuss religious topics, and he grounded this choice in the ambiguity of the topic itself. The finale of the Dialogues has raised endless debates and provoked many theories among the scholars who worked on Hume’s thought. I hope to show that Yandell’s analysis of Hume shows some similarities with Bakhtin’s famous analysis of Fyodor Dostoevsky’s characters, and that this comparison provides insight into Hume’s methodological approach to dialogue (4). I hope to show that Hume’s Dialogues are still relevant for our contemporary philosophy of dialogue and that his stylistic choice still offers material for developing further reflections in the field

Context and Aspects of Dialogues concerning Natural Religion

Interpretations of Hume’s Dialogues concerning Natural Religion

A Twentieth-Century Perspective: “A Multi-Vocal Dialogue Avant la Lettre”

A Matter of How We Look at the World

Conclusions