An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals by David Hume

Listener Reviews

1. 3.0(1)

   Poor reading, superficial ideas

   My first remark is that the reader makes so many mistakes that it makes the text unintelligible at several points, and is often unpleasant. As far as as Hume’s treatise, I was surprised by how superficial and idiosyncratic a thinker he is. The mystery is this: how did he become so famous?? He does have a certain optimistic love of humanity, which makes him endearing, but he is a sophist. The reading of this book lead me to suspect that the Enlightenment may really be the dark ages of philosophy!

   David Vigil · February 24, 2023

2. 5.0(1)

   if fedoras had time machines

   *dips quill in ink, tips velvet cap* I kid, it was pretty good, but youd think since paper was so expensive back in the day that like 10 pages would have been plenty

   Shantel Lester · January 26, 2023

3. 3.0(1)

   The performance is abysmal

   This is a classic book full of insight into justice, politics, and morality. The reader, however, doesn't understand what he is reading. Many words are mispronounced or replaced with different words that sound similar (e.g. he says immortality instead of immorality). Every question is spoken with the same 'dumb teenager' upward inflection. I couldn't get through it, instead I bought the book and read it the old fashioned way.

   Brooke Hurt · December 15, 2020

4. 5.0(1)

   Masterful Classic, Idiotic Narration

   This is an under appreciated classic in moral philosophy. It actually inaugurates two separate schools of moral philosophy, utiliarianism and a theory of sentiments, into a coherent whole. For a classic in philosophy it is relatively easy to understand and unusually well grounded in common moral intuitions. Hume also happens to be, for a philosopher, an unusually good writer. However, the reading is idiotic, robotic, and lazy. There were dozens of instances in which the reader clearly mispronounced something, like barbarous pronounced as bar-bear-us, without correcting it in the editing. There were countless mispronunciations of philosophical terms, like util-Arianism, which was a massive distraction, highlighting the fact that the reader had no idea whatsoever what he was narrating. But the biggest problem was the lazy, robotic sense of disengagement with the text. I hesitate to say this, having watched Joey struggle through something like 10 seasons of friends with his bad acting, but this guy desperately needs to find a new line of work or else take what he is doing far more seriously. Nevertheless, the material is so good it is worth at least a couple of listens.

   Annabelle Donaldson · August 20, 2019

5. 2.0(1)

   Not what I thought it was

   I didn’t know this was just a summary of his writing which is my fault but the narrator is very wooden. I kept finding myself daydreaming during the narrative.

   Savannah Anthony · May 3, 2019