Thank You for this lectures I am teaching myself Using this.

I have a comment on the Questioning of the idea of Hume origin of knowledge precisely about the relationship between an idea and impression on a blind man specifically.What the other authors have precisely done is is just argue about the certainty of simple Ideas from Impression rather than giving an alternative way to think about it.If there is another way to show us how a blind man arrives to an impression of a color red or any other color in that fact,why have they not offered a criterion and argument that in certainty the blind man can be able to see color red without its impression. Humes idea on Impression on simple Idea has an improbability of being wrong based on the premise expounded but we cannot deny its effectiveness in any philosophical discussion.He managed to close down an endless loop of the same question by making such a claim.The loop of question is how do you know with CERTAINTY that this is the case precisely with the Blind person.Or even with someone who has damaged nerves his entire life and you ask him to give you an idea of how it feels to have physical pain. His argument in this is close to truth because it is based on what most people can relate to and any other thing is just intellectual rational word play which he was trying to prevent.Arguments based on a general reality are closed to truth than arguments which are not. So I challenge the people who question that specific fact discussed there to give an alternative approach which is more effective than Humes.

This guys has no clue and is all over the place trying to show his own intellect.