What did Thomas Reid disagree with Hume about?

Thomas Reid's philosophical position diverged significantly from David Hume's primarily in the realm of knowledge and skepticism. Reid was critical of Hume's skeptical approach, which questioned whether we can truly know anything about the external world and the nature of causation. While Hume argued that our knowledge is limited to impressions and ideas and raised doubts about the reliability of our senses, Reid took a more optimistic stance regarding human knowledge. He believed that certain truths about the world could be known with certainty through direct experience and perception, thus rejecting Hume’s more radical skepticism.

Reid emphasized the common-sense view that humans do possess certain innate epistemological faculties that allow them to gain knowledge of the world, especially through perception and reasoning. This perspective directly counters Hume's skepticism about the extent and nature of our knowledge, positioning Reid as a proponent of a more optimistic, realist view of knowledge acquisition.

The focus on knowledge and skepticism highlights the fundamental philosophical debates between the approaches of Reid and Hume, illustrating a key point of divergence in their thought processes.