Abstract

The essay from the anthology to which I would award first prize is John Biro’s discussion, “Hume’s New Science of the Mind,” which reveals the extent to which Hume was already engaged in what we now call the “naturalization” of epistemology. Biro defends Hume’s causal account of personal identity and charts connections between his account of the mind and recent developments in cognitive science. Of course, some questions about Hume’s theory of mind remain unanswered. In particular, nothing is said in explanation of Hume’s own lament that his account is incoherent. Nonetheless, this essay demonstrates the relevance and fascination of Hume. One is not left with the impression that a shorter essay could have done as much. On the contrary, I found myself wanting more. In the next discussion, Alex Rosenberg does an excellent job of defending the claim that no philosopher is more important than Hume in defining the themes that came to occupy philosophers of science in the twentieth century. The essay deals with the empiricist theory of meaning, causation, and induction, and the role of general laws in scientific explanations.