The answers indicate the kind of “material” looked for in your answers—they are not, as written, what are expected as “answers” from you. 1. Hume distinguishes between judgments based on relations of ideas and those that are about matters of fact. Indicate what that is and how it is relevant as a criticism of Anselm’s ontological argument. Judgments based on the relations of ideas are made without appeal to experience, and are grounded in the law of non-contradiction. These include judgments in geometry and arithmetic. Judgments about matters of fact—including judgments about whether a thing exists or does not—are not based on their denial violating the law of non-contradiction, since the contrary of every matter of fact is possible. For this reason, Hume argues that we cannot obtain knowledge of matters of fact by appeal to the relation of ideas. This is what Anselm mistakenly tried to do when he argued for God’s existence (a matter of fact) simply by building the idea of existence into the
This is the end of the preview. Sign up
access the rest of the document.