David Hume, Scottish philosopher and economist, set forth his definition of liberty throughout his writings. He established a definition of free-will based on moral responsibility and its relationship with desire. Other philosophers, past and modern, have dissented on Hume’s definition of liberty, describing it as flawed. Though Hume does deliver a strong definition of liberty, it falls short in the face of criticism, and fails to apply universally when the relationship between responsibility and desire is closely examined.
Throughout Hume’s writings, a subjective definition of liberty can be found. He does not believe in chance, affirming that every action has a cause. The reason behind the cause of an action does not universally apply to every action, and specific causes pertain to specific actions. A person is liberated, or has free-will, whenever the determination for a particular action is made by the person’s inner will or desire. There are situations that arise, leading a person to make a decision that conflicts with their will, meaning that decision has not been determined by the person’s free-will, and that person cannot be held accountable for that action. The only situation in which a person can be held accountable for their actions is one where that person freely made the decision based on what they desired to do. For example, if a person were to desire wealth and decided to obtain their fortune by robbing a bank, they would be responsible for their actions as their desires lead to the action to rob a bank, and they acted according to their free-will. If the guard on-duty decided to open fire on the armed robber, wounding and killing them, the guard could not be held responsible for their actions, as the action they took was determined by the robber’s decision to violently threaten the occupants of the bank. Liberty, then, is the ability to take action according to one’s wishes or desires per Hume. Other philosophers believe, however, that there are fundamental flaws in the definitions that Hume provides.
One of the issues with Hume’s definition of liberty is that it ascribes freedom to actions caused by a person’s desires when the desires have causes outside of the person’s control. Hume’s approach to liberty explicitly provides that a person is free only when their will causes their action, however, a person’s will is affected by external causes. Specifically, by believing that all things in the universe occur according to fixed laws, everything would be predictable to some degree. This means that when applying Hume’s definition of liberty, even though on some level a person’s actions are predetermined, they can still be considered free. Freedom and predetermination conflict, however, as there is no way for someone to be considered truly free if they have no control of what happens in their future. For example, take a child growing up in a lower-income household where they cannot obtain everything that they desire. If they decide, as a financially stable parent later in life, they desire to provide their children with their wants, that desire was influenced by the circumstance that impacted them earlier in life. They did not have the free-will to determine the situation they were placed into, and the situation lead to altered desires. Hume’s definition of liberty does not provide explanation for this situations, and instead declares that free-will has occurred. By examining this critique of Hume, it can be seen that the definition of liberty he provides is not ironclad.
Another effective way to critique Hume’s definition is to more closely examine the relationship between responsibility and desire. Hume argues that a person bears responsibility for the action they undertook only if that cause stems from their desire. If someone needs food to feed their children and desires to commit no crime, however, they find no other option than to steal bread from the local bakery, according to Hume they are not responsible for their action. That person, fully understanding the risks of stealing the bread, still decided against their desire and committed a crime, for which they should be held accountable. There were other options available to the person than to commit a crime, and even though they did not want to, they, and they alone made the executive decision to thieve. There are circumstances where a person’s desires and actions conflict, and if the circumstance permits, the person should be held accountable. Through examining the relationship between a person’s responsibility and desire, a free agent can be seen to commit an action that directly conflicts with their wishes, meaning that Hume’s definition of liberty cannot be accurate.
Hume’s definition of liberty is well-conceived, however, when criticized the fatal flaws within become apparent. Hume believes that the universe follows preset guidelines, and because of this, his definition falls short as he leaves room for predetermination to be described as free-will. Furthermore, by tying responsibility closely to desire, he fails to recognize circumstances in which a person is acting freely, even though it conflicts with their desire. Though Hume authored influential works in the field of philosophy, his definition falls short of being completely accurate.