Upon its publication,
Hume's friend Hugh Blair wrote to Strahan commenting on the lack
of "noise" that it produced.
As to D. Hume's Dialogues, I am surprised that though they
have now been published for some time, they have made so
little noise. They are exceedingly elegant. They bring
together some of his most exceptionable reasonings, but the
principles themselves were all in his former works. [August
3, 1779]
Within the following few months, four reviews of Hume's Dialogues
appeared, each of which confirmed Blair's initial reaction. The
first review to appear was the lead article in the Critical
Review journal. The review opened noting that "neither the
friends of religion have any occasion to be alarmed, nor her
enemies to triumph. Freedom of enquiry can never be injurious to
the cause of truth." The reviewer concludes with only mild
criticism arguing that "If the objections advanced by Philo had
been produced with modesty, and answered by Cleanthes as fully as
the nature of the question would have allowed, the author would
have been applauded by every sensible and discerning reader. But
when they are proposed with an air of triumph and defiance, this
work assumes a more disadvantageous form, the aspect of
infidelity." (September 1779, Vol. 48, pp. 161-172). The second
review of the Dialogues which appeared in the London Review was
more flattering. The review expresses hope that "it will prove
no unacceptable present to the orthodox" and concludes that
".
Pages:
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28