Negative Readings of ‘True Religion’: Some General Problems with Interpretation

This chapter begins with a primary analysis of true religion and summarizes the main arguments for the positive and negative readings. Then, it explicates some general problems with the negative (ironic-insincere) reading according to which Hume was a closet atheist, ‘true religion’ has no substantial meaning and plays at most a tactical role in Hume. It analyses how an author’s intention and position could be best interpreted, and how and when we can take at face value what an author writes and apparently endorses, especially in a fictional dialogue. It shall be argued that the methodological principle (according to which Hume’s best arguments entail a non-theistic conclusion) motivating the ironic or insincere readings of Hume’s statements on theism is problematic and does not support a negative reading. There are reasons to doubt that Hume really thinks that his criticism of the design argument is incompatible with all forms of theism. Finally, the chapter points out some clues in Hume’s use of language about religion, theism and the distinction between true and vulgar religion, which indicate the sincerity of his positive remarks on both minimal theism and true religion.