David Hume and International Society

  • Edwin van de Haar
Part of the Palgrave Macmillan History of International Thought Series book series (PMHIT)


Nowadays David Hume (1711–1776) is most famous for his philosophical work, but his contemporaries were far more interested in his political views. This difference is one of the reasons why his ideas on international political issues are often overlooked or misinterpreted. Although he never wrote a book on international relations, Hume regularly referred to this topic in most of his works, with the exception of his writings on religion. His political writings comprise his Essays and The History of England and they must be seen as reactions to current debates and reflections on topical issues as well as attempts to empirically prove his philosophical views.1


Human Nature International Society Free Trade International Relation National Character 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Schlereth, T.J. The Cosmopolitan Ideal in Enlightenment Thought: Its Form and Function in the Ideas of Franklin, Hume and Voltaire, 1694–1790. Notre Dame and London: University of Notre Dame Press. 1977. p. 108.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Forbes, Duncan. Hume’s Philosophical Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1975. p. 140.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Klibansky, Raymond, and Ernest C. Mossner. “Introduction.” In New Letters of David Hume. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1954. p. xxvii.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    For more details and a positive opinion on his diplomatic efforts, see Mossner, Ernest C. The Life of David Hume. Oxford: Clarendon. 1980. pp. 489, 533–556.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bongie, Laurence L. David Hume: Prophet of the Counter-Revolution. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund. 2000.Google Scholar
  6. 12.
    Hume, David. The Letters of David Hume. Oxford: Clarendon. 1932. number 69a.Google Scholar
  7. 15.
    Ainslie, D.C. “The Problem of the National Self in Hume’s Theory of Justice.” Hume Studies XXI(2):289–313. 1995. p. 306.Google Scholar
  8. 18.
    Hayman, J.G. “Notions on National Characters in the Eighteenth Century.” Huntington Library Quarterly 35 (1):1–17. 1971. pp. 13–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 22.
    Stewart, J.B. Opinion and Reform in Hume’s Political Philosophy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 1992. p. 311.Google Scholar
  10. 27.
    King, James T. “The Virtue of Political Skepticism.” Reason Papers 15:24–46. 1990. pp. 24–25, 44.Google Scholar
  11. 28.
    Pocock, J.G.A. Virtue, Commerce and History: Essays on Political Thought and History, Chiefly in the Eighteenth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1985. p. 138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 35.
    Glossop, R.J. “Hume and the Future of the Society of Nations.” Hume Studies X (1):46–58. 1984. p. 51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 41.
    Oz-Salzberger, Fania. “The Political Theory of the Scottish Enlightenment.” In The Cambridge Companion to the Scottish Enlightenment. Edited by A. Broadie. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2003. p. 169.Google Scholar
  14. 52.
    Black, Jeremy. “The Theory of Balance of Power in the First Half of the Eighteenth Century: A Note on Resources.” Review of International Studies 9 (1):55–61. 1983. pp. 55–61;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sofka, James R. “The Eighteenth Century International System: Parity or Primacy?” Review of International Studies 27 (2):147–163. 2001. pp. 147–153.Google Scholar
  16. 54.
    Linares, F. Das Politischen Denken von David Hume. Hildesheim: Georg Olms. 1984. pp. 81–82.Google Scholar
  17. 55.
    Whelan, F.G. “Robertson, Hume and the Balance of Power.” Hume Studies XXI (2):315–332. 1995. pp. 316–317.Google Scholar
  18. 63.
    Hume, David. New Letters of David Hume. Oxford: Clarendon. 1954. number 127.Google Scholar
  19. 65.
    Stewart, J.B. The Moral and Political Philosophy of David Hume. New York and London: Columbia University Press. 1963. p. 194.Google Scholar
  20. 68.
    Danford, J.D. “Hume’s History and the Parameters of Economic Development.” In Liberty in Hume’s History of England. Edited by N. Capaldi and D.W. Livingston. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 1990. pp. 161–168.Google Scholar
  21. 72.
    Stewart. Opinion and Reform, p. 308; Letwin, Shirley Robin. The Pursuit of Certainty: David Hume, Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill, Beatrice Webb. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund. 1998. p. 116.Google Scholar
  22. 77.
    Werner, J.M. “David Hume and America.” Journal of the History of Ideas 33 (3):439–456. 1972. pp. 439–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 82.
    Robbins, Lionel. A History of Economic Thought: The LSE Lectures. Edited by Steven G. Medema and Warren J. Samuels. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press. 2000. p. 151;Google Scholar
  24. Fieser, James, ed. Early Responses to Hume’s Moral, Literary and Political Writings. Bristol: Thoemmes. 2005. pp. xii–xiii.Google Scholar
  25. 83.
    Skinner, Andrew S. “David Hume: Principles of Political Economy.” In The Cambridge Companion to Hume. Edited by D.F. Norton. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1993. pp. 239–245.Google Scholar
  26. 86.
    McGee, R.W. “The Economic Thought of David Hume.” Hume Studies XV (1):185–205. 1989. pp. 197–199.Google Scholar
  27. 87.
    Miller, D. Philosophy and Ideology in Hume’s Political Thought. Oxford: Clarendon. 1981. p. 125.Google Scholar
  28. 88.
    Soule, E. “Hume on Economic Policy and Human Nature.” Hume Studies XXVI (1):143–157. 2000. p. 146; Hume. E. p. 262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 90.
    Manzer, R.A. “The Promise of Peace? Hume and Smith on the Effects of Commerce on War and Peace.” Hume Studies XXII (2):369–382. 1996. pp. 369–382.Google Scholar
  30. 91.
    Irwin, Douglas A. Against the Tide: An Intellectual History of Free Trade. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 1996. p. 76; Sally. Classical liberalism. p. 57.Google Scholar
  31. 94.
    Muller, Jerry Z. The Mind and the Market: Capitalism in Modern European Thought. New York: Anchor Books. 2002. p. 54.Google Scholar
  32. 95.
    Cohen, M. “Moral Skepticism and International Relations.” Philosophy and Public Affairs 13 (4):299–346. 1984. p. 301.Google Scholar
  33. 96.
    For example, Linares. Politische Denken; Nye Jr., Joseph N. “The Changing Nature of World Power.” Political Science Quarterly 105 (2):177–192. 1990;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Brown, Chris. Understanding International Relations. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave. 2001. p. 107;Google Scholar
  35. Jervis, R. “A Political Science Perspective on the Balance of Power and the Concert.” American Historical Review 97 (3):716–724. 1992. p. 718; Knutsen. History, p. 122;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Waltz, Kenneth N. “Anarchic Orders and Balances of Power.” In Neorealism and Its Critics. Edited by R.O. Keohane. New York: Columbia University Press. 1986. p. 119; Sofka. Eighteenth Century, p. 154;Google Scholar
  37. Vasquez, J.A. Classics of International Relations. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. 1990. pp. 273–276;Google Scholar
  38. Haas, E.B. “The Balance of Power: Prescription, Concept or Propaganda.” World Politics 5 (4):442–477. 1953. p. 456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 97.
    Boucher, David. Political Theories of International Relations: From Thucydides to the Present. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1998. p. 145.Google Scholar
  40. 98.
    Walzer, M. Just and Unjust Wars. New York: Basic Books. 1992. p. 76.Google Scholar
  41. 104.
    Brown, Chris. Sovereignty, Rights and Justice: International Political Theory Today. Cambridge: Polity. 2002. pp. 40–41, 47–48.Google Scholar
  42. 111.
    Alderson, Kai, and Andrew Hurrell, eds. Hedley Bull on International Society. Houndmills, Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 2000. pp. 139–169.Google Scholar
  43. 112.
    Vincent, R.J. “Order in International Politics.” In Order and Violence: Hedley Bull and International Relations. Edited by J.D.B. Miller and R.J. Vincent. Oxford: Clarendon. 1988. pp. 43–45.Google Scholar
  44. 113.
    Niebuhr, Reinhold. Moral Man and Immoral Society: A Study in Ethics and Politics. New York: Charles Scribner’s. 1960, pp. xi–xv.Google Scholar
  45. 114.
    Rengger, N.J. “Tragedy or Scepticism? Defending the Anti-Pelagian Mind in World Politics.” International Relations 19 (3):321–328. 2005. pp. 323–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Edwin van de Haar 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edwin van de Haar

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations