Hume’s point near the end of Book Three, Part One is that a rational theory of morals, which assumes that moral principles are timeless, universal, and compulsory, cannot account for the ways we distinguish actions taken by humans, objects and animals. Use Hume’s empiricist theory of morals to explain why parricide or incest is immoral in humans, but accepted in inanimate objects and animals. In other words, what makes us feel “uneasy” when we perceive these as human actions, rather than the actions of objects or animals? Choose ONE example to analyze.

This essay needs a strong central idea – arguable claim about the reading beyond what is obvious. A very clear thesis. Appropriate, convincing textual evidence with QUOTES and thorough explanation. Please do not use sophisticated diction that might be out of a regular college student’s reach

.Do you want your assignment written by the best essay experts? Then look no further. Our team of experienced writers are on standby to deliver to you a quality written paper as per your specified instructions. Order Now, and enjoy an amazing discount!!