The main difference between belief and fiction is much simpler than our complex minds wish it to be. The difference is feeling. There’s a feeling in our mind when belief is present that differs from the presence of fiction. Take a minute and explore your surroundings with your senses. What do you see, feel, smell, and taste? Now imagine you're a character in your favorite book. What do you see, feel, smell, and taste? Now compare the two experiences. Which one was more livid? Which one were your senses more controlled? Which one did you feel most present in? If you are like most people, it would be your current surrounding, not the imagined surroundings. This is because of a feeling, and you can’t necessarily describe the feeling but it's there. They felt different and that's the difference. Belief has a more lively, vivid, present feeling that fiction just doesn’t present. This may be hard to comprehend, in fact, Hume put a warning in this section for more calculated minds. Because this is a hard thing to consider. As humans, we strive for knowledge but are confused when the knowledge gives us questions instead of answers. In fact, that's one of the strengths, weakness of Hume's philosophy. He saw that though we want to be logical, feeling control most of our actions, thoughts, and prayers. The feeling is a big part of Hume’s philosophy. Though sometimes it is …show more content…
Now like our senses combining to give us experience, we must now combine this topic with an idea. Because, like all good philosophy, everything ties together one way or another. In this particular way, all the theories we have discussed are philosophies of Hume. Now, how do the remaining tie together? This is actually quite simple. Empiricism is knowledge based on sensory experience. Without empiricism, we could not have either belief or fiction. Fiction is primarily based on the knowledge of our sensory experiences. Without empiricism, there is nothing to pull the ideas from. A cook can not cook without any food, and fiction and empiricism are the same. Though different, they correlate. Food can still exist without a cook, but without food, a cook is no longer a cook. Therefore empiricism can exist without fiction, but without empiricism, fiction is no longer fiction. Belief, however, is a little more tricky. Without belief, empiricism has no knowledge to obtain. Therefore without knowledge, the theory is irrelevant. Belief, though, is the presence of senses but you know not what these senses are without former knowledge of something you can correlate them with. WIthout empiricism, belief is not belief, but more the ugly twin sister of belief. It may have the same qualities, but it’s not the