Enter the mind of the Enlightenment’s greatest skeptic as he stages a philosophical debate about the existence and nature of God—a debate conducted with such wit, subtlety, and intellectual power that it remains one of the most important works of philosophy ever written, and read the complete book online for free.
Completed in the 1750s but published posthumously in 1779, Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion is David Hume’s masterpiece of philosophical inquiry—a work that brings together all the strands of his thought in a form of extraordinary elegance and power. Hume, the greatest philosopher to write in English, had spent his career developing a devastating critique of traditional religion. In the Dialogues, he gave this critique its most complete expression, presenting it not as a dogmatic refutation but as a conversation among intelligent, passionate, and deeply conflicted characters who represent the range of philosophical positions on the question of God.
The Dialogues take the form of a conversation among three friends: Cleanthes, who defends the argument from design; Philo, who subjects that argument to skeptical critique; and Demea, who represents the tradition of religious orthodoxy. Their conversation ranges over the nature of the universe, the limits of human reason, the problem of evil, and the question of whether we can know anything at all about the divine. Hume’s own position is famously difficult to identify—he gives devastating arguments to each of his characters—but the cumulative effect of the Dialogues is one of the most powerful critiques of natural theology ever written.
On this page, you can experience the work that Hume considered his most important philosophical achievement, a book that has challenged and inspired readers for more than two centuries. We offer the complete 1779 work for online reading.
Book Info
| Detail | Information |
|---|---|
| Title | Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion |
| Author | David Hume |
| Year of Publication | 1779 |
| Genre | Philosophy, Theology, Dialogue |
| Language | English |
| Legal Status | Public Domain Worldwide |
| Format | Online Reading |
Read Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion Online
Witness the greatest philosophical conversation ever written as Cleanthes, Philo, and Demea debate the most profound questions human beings can ask: Does God exist? Can we know anything about the divine nature? What is the relationship between reason and faith? Begin this masterpiece of Enlightenment philosophy by exploring the opening sections interactively below.
This preview introduces the characters and the central question of the dialogue: whether natural reason can establish the existence and nature of God. However, the full, astonishing debate—the argument from design, the critique of anthropomorphism, the problem of evil, and the final, ambiguous conclusion—is available in the complete text for our subscribers.
A subscription unlocks this essential work of philosophy, a book that has shaped the understanding of religion for two centuries, and grants access to our entire library of classic masterpieces.
About the Work Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion
Hume chose the dialogue form for this work because it allowed him to present the arguments for and against religion with equal force, without committing himself to any particular position. The result is a work of extraordinary intellectual power and literary grace.
The Characters: Three Voices of Reason
The Dialogues are set in the study of Pamphilus, who serves as the narrator and presents the conversation that he witnessed years before. The three speakers each represent a distinct philosophical position:
- Cleanthes is the voice of empirical natural theology. He argues that the order and design we observe in the universe provide compelling evidence for a designer. His position is based on the argument from analogy: just as a watch implies a watchmaker, so the intricate order of nature implies a divine intelligence. Cleanthes is confident, clear, and deeply committed to the idea that reason can establish the existence of God.
- Demea represents the tradition of religious orthodoxy. He argues that the divine nature is utterly incomprehensible to human reason, and that we must rely on revelation and faith rather than philosophical argument. He is troubled by Cleanthes’s anthropomorphism—the tendency to imagine God in human terms—and by the philosophical implications of the design argument. Demea’s position is less intellectually fashionable than Cleanthes’s, but it has the weight of tradition behind it.
- Philo is the voice of skepticism. He subjects every argument for the existence and nature of God to searching critique, showing the weaknesses in both Cleanthes’s empiricism and Demea’s mysticism. He is witty, subtle, and devastatingly effective at exposing the assumptions that underlie natural theology. Readers have long identified Philo as Hume’s spokesman, but the matter is more complex: Philo’s arguments are Humean, but Hume gives him the hardest lines while also showing the limitations of pure skepticism.
The Argument from Design
The central argument of the Dialogues is Cleanthes’s argument from design. He proposes that the order and adaptation we observe in nature—the structure of the eye, the movements of the planets, the intricate web of causes and effects—compel us to infer a designer, just as the discovery of a watch would compel us to infer a watchmaker.
Philo’s response is devastating. He argues that the analogy between natural objects and human artifacts is weak. The universe is unique; we cannot compare it to other universes and therefore cannot infer its cause. The argument from design, Philo suggests, is at best an argument for a limited, imperfect designer—perhaps a committee of gods, perhaps an incompetent one, perhaps one who has since died. And even if the argument succeeded, it would tell us nothing about the moral attributes of the designer.
The Problem of Evil
One of the most powerful sections of the Dialogues is Philo’s treatment of the problem of evil. He argues that the presence of suffering in the world is inconsistent with the existence of a benevolent, omnipotent God. If God is good, he would want to prevent suffering; if he is powerful, he could prevent it; suffering exists, so God cannot be both good and powerful.
This argument has never been answered to the satisfaction of philosophers, and Philo presents it with particular force. He catalogs the suffering of sentient beings with a vividness that anticipates later discussions of the problem of evil. The universe, he suggests, looks more like the product of an indifferent or even malevolent intelligence than like the work of a benevolent creator.
Anthropomorphism and the Limits of Analogy
Throughout the Dialogues, Philo returns to the problem of anthropomorphism—the tendency to imagine God in human terms. He argues that when we speak of divine intelligence, we are using a term that derives its meaning from human experience. To apply it to a being that is infinite, eternal, and utterly unlike anything in human experience is to stretch the term beyond its meaning.
Cleanthes insists that we have no choice but to reason by analogy from what we know. Philo replies that this is precisely the problem: we know nothing of the divine, and therefore any analogy we draw will be hopelessly inadequate. The result, Philo suggests, is that natural theology can tell us nothing at all about the nature of God.
The Cosmological Argument and the Infinite Regress
Demea introduces the cosmological argument—the argument that there must be a first cause of the universe, and that this first cause is God. Philo subjects this argument to critique as well, asking why the universe itself could not be the first cause, why the chain of causes could not be infinite, why the argument from contingency should compel belief in a necessary being.
The cosmological argument, Philo suggests, is based on assumptions about causation that cannot be justified. We observe causes and effects within the universe, but we have no experience of the universe as a whole. To apply the logic of causation to the universe itself is to go beyond the limits of human knowledge.
The Ambiguous Conclusion
The Dialogues conclude with a famous ambiguity. After Philo has dismantled every argument for natural religion, Cleanthes asks him whether he is actually an atheist. Philo replies that he is not—that the arguments for religion, while not demonstrative, are nevertheless probable, and that a cautious skepticism should lead us to affirm the existence of a divine being while acknowledging our ignorance of its nature.
This conclusion has been read in many ways. Some readers see it as Hume’s genuine position: a skeptical theism that affirms the existence of God while denying the possibility of theological knowledge. Others see it as an ironic concession, a way of publishing a work that would otherwise have been suppressed. Others see it as a final philosophical joke, leaving the reader to decide for herself.
What is clear is that the Dialogues do not settle the question they raise. They are not designed to. They are designed to show the limits of human reason when it confronts the most profound questions, and to suggest that the appropriate response is not dogmatic atheism or dogmatic theism but a humble acknowledgment of our ignorance.
Why Read the Dialogues Today?
The questions Hume raised in the Dialogues have not gone away. The argument from design continues to be advanced by intelligent design theorists and others. The problem of evil continues to trouble believers and non-believers alike. The limits of analogy, the problem of anthropomorphism, the question of what we can know about the divine—these are questions that philosophy and theology continue to debate.
Hume’s Dialogues are valuable not because they settle these questions but because they articulate them with extraordinary clarity and force. Hume is a model of philosophical honesty: he does not pretend to know more than he knows, and he does not allow his preferences to dictate his conclusions. He is willing to follow the argument wherever it leads, even if that leads to uncomfortable places.
For anyone interested in the philosophy of religion, the Dialogues are essential reading. For anyone interested in the history of ideas, they are a monument of the Enlightenment. For any reader who enjoys the play of intelligent minds on the most profound questions, they are a pleasure that never fades.
FAQ
Is this a difficult read?
The Dialogues are challenging, but they are also among the most accessible of Hume’s works. The dialogue form makes the arguments lively and engaging, and Hume’s prose is clear, elegant, and often witty. A reader with patience and curiosity can work through the Dialogues without prior philosophical training.
What is natural religion?
Natural religion is the attempt to establish religious truths through reason alone, without appeal to revelation or faith. Hume’s Dialogues consider whether natural religion can succeed. His conclusion, broadly, is that it cannot—that reason is incapable of establishing the existence or nature of God with any certainty.
*Do I need to know Hume’s other work to understand the Dialogues?
No. The Dialogues stand alone as a work of philosophy. Knowledge of Hume’s earlier work on causation and human nature enriches the reading, but it is not necessary.
*Is Hume an atheist?
This question has been debated for two centuries. Hume was certainly a critic of religion, and his work was understood by his contemporaries as an attack on religious belief. But he was careful never to declare himself an atheist, and the Dialogues end with a qualified affirmation of religious belief. Most scholars today consider Hume a skeptic about religion rather than a dogmatic atheist.
*Can I read it on my phone?
Absolutely. The Dialogues are divided into twelve parts, each of which can be read in a sitting. The conversational form makes the work particularly well suited to mobile reading—each exchange is a self-contained unit of argument, perfect for reading in short sessions and thinking about throughout the day.