Because Hume does not study human nature from the perspective of things or scientific logic, many concepts are western philosophical names, self-created names, and it is difficult to understand without the foundation of western philosophy. But it doesn't matter if you don't understand. Because in today's view, Hume's theory is wrong and of no value to modern human philosophy and human studies (but in the European philosophy circle at that time, it was philosophers who surprised the west and promoted the perfection of philosophical theory, so there appeared such philosophical masters as Kant, Hegel and Feuerbach, but they were expanded and destroyed by Nietzsche's voluntarism, and then there appeared existentialism, phenomenology, language structuralism and deconstruction, scientism and anti-scientism. From the title, we think that Hume's Theory of Human Nature is a philosophical philosophy that studies human nature, but in fact, this title is a wrong translation in Chinese, and the accurate Chinese translation is about the natural attributes of human beings, or about their natural characteristics. However, Hume did not really understand or study human nature from the objective and natural threshold, but expounded (rather than understood or studied) human cognition, feelings and morality from the subjective threshold. After reading this book, you still don't understand what real human nature is. The same is true of Hume's Research on Human Understanding, which neither studies human understanding from the objective natural threshold nor from the subjective functional threshold, nor from the relationship between subjective and objective cognition and cognition, but discusses (rather than studies) human understanding from the subjective understanding threshold, negates universality with special differences, and puts forward skepticism. For example, as long as Hume saw that a chef didn't wash dishes or eat by himself because he saved time, cost, energy and business (based on the chef's personal subjective consciousness and selfishness, Hume realized that all chefs had the problem of not washing dishes, so Hume doubted or even denied all chefs. The result that Hume needs is the result of doubt that "the chef's hygiene is unreliable". He didn't take into account that most chefs want to clean their dishes based on business rules, professional quality, management mechanism, long-term customers, chef's reputation, customer god and so on.
Therefore, after Plato, Aristotle and Epicurus, look at Bacon, Descartes, Kant, Hegel, Heidegger (including Husserl), Wigenstein and Popper, and it is best to look at the works of western idealism, so as to compare the idealism of the East and the West.