David Hume's Antecedent Skepticism

David Hume's explains two types of skepticism: antecedent and consequent. Both of these come in a very moderate and extreme form. He explains antecedent skepticism by using the Descartes theory of universal doubt. He explains that there is no principle that is more self evident than doubt and even if there was we would not be able to advance ahead of it because we our still able to doubt and reason deductively. This would mean Antecedent skepticism is incurable. Though this extreme antecedent skepticism can not be worked around , Hume endorses a more moderate form of this kind of skepticism, which is more like a preparation for doing philosophy. It is composed of forming unbiased opinions, moving forward by small steps from sound first
It questions our continuous inferences and judgments by doubting the basics on which they originated from. Hume uses our senses as an example. We believe that what our senses tells us is an accurate and represents the external world as we see it but, our perceptions change when we our in different positions in the world and there are times where our senses are incorrect ; for example, seeing double when pressing on your eye to hard. Our belief in an external world can only be justified by experience but, experience can not justify doubt. Hume comes to a conclusion that our beliefs in an external world is not rationally justified since all we experience is our perceptions.. Consequent skepticism in its extreme form can result in complete inactivity. Philosophers have already decided secondary and primary such as color, sound, texture, extension and solidity, as qualities that our dependent on experience and the senses . If we doubt these experiences we no longer understand matter. We would not be sure of anything so there wouldn’t be any point of doing
Mitigated skepticism is about being aware that one cannot trust his/her senses, but still just assuming everything is true for the sake of living life. It is an acknowledgement that reason is not always reliable. So Hume would say that belief in these are rationally unjustified, but we instinctively believe them out of habit. Believing in causation and freedom is illogical, but we accept them because of habit and experience . Furthermore, it allows us to get by in life since we are not constantly doubting the existence of the external world