Final answer:
David Hume argues that even though it is highly probable that the sun will rise tomorrow based on past occurrences and scientific understanding of the Earth's rotation, it is not guaranteed to be certain due to the possibility of unimaginable events, emphasizing the role of probability over certainty and the limitations of inductive reasoning.
Step-by-step explanation:
David Hume challenges the idea of absolute certainty in what seems to be natural occurrences, such as the sunrise. While we have strong scientific evidence to support that the sun will rise tomorrow due to the consistency of the Earth's rotation, Hume argues that this does not guarantee certainty. Events that are extremely unlikely, like an asteroid hitting Earth or the sun going supernova, are imaginable even if they contradict our experiences. Therefore, while highly probable, the sunrise is not certain—a principle that extends to Hume’s skepticism of laws of nature and miracles. Hume’s position is that for any claim against the consistency of the laws of nature, clear and convincing evidence is needed, given the overwhelming evidence of these laws' stability.
In his critique, Hume is essentially questioning the validity of inductive reasoning, which is the process of making generalized predictions based on past observations. This reflects his broader philosophical inquiry into the nature of human knowledge and the limitations of our understanding of the world around us. His arguments emphasize the role of probability over certainty and caution against the assumption that future events will always follow past patterns.