David Hume (1711-1776) was a famous British philosopher who extended the empiricism of formerly philosophers like John Locke and developed a radical skepticism .He argued that every prediction about the unobserved is uncertain. And rejected the possibility of certain knowledge. According to his view all our knowledge is based on our sense expressions. We make inferences (deductions) from these sense expressions, but these inferences are a result of our habit.
             Although Immanuel Kant (1774-1804) maintained that, after he had read David Hume he woke from his dogmatic slumber and became a critical philosopher, he isn't of the opinion of Hume about the problem of Causality. He rejects the view that cause and effect relations are cognized through implicit or explicit inference from the past. On the contrary he argues that cognition of causal relations is in some sense a sine qua non of the possibility of experience and therefore the very concept cannot be extracted from perception.
             Throughout my paper I will try briefly to discuss the cause and effect relation according to views of both philosophers by explaining their thoughts and by comparing them with each other.
             David Hume maintained that there exits seven different kinds of philosophical relations and he divided these relations into two groups. In the first group there are relations that are dependent on ideas and these relations are resemblance, proportion in quantity, degrees in quality and contrariety. On the contrary relations in the second group- identity, spatio-temporal situation and causality- are not dependent on ideas. They are able to change without any change in ideas.
             Hume argues that there exists anything over the world which human being is able to foresee without the help of memory and sense expression. With the help of cause and effect relation we can get information from experience. Human reasoning is only possible with a comparison between two or more...