An agent is also defined as a person or thing that takes an active role or produces a specified effect. Anyhow. You mentioned that you have a physical body that calls it a person. That is all right to me.

I am not sure if agent is a technical term to mean what you mean. But if you said you are a person, then it would have been clearer. :D Carry on my friend ~

An agent is also defined as a person or thing that takes an active role or produces a specified effect. — MoK

Why was your definition not in the dictionary?

I am not sure if agent is a technical term to mean what you mean. But if you said you are a person, then it would have been clearer. :D Carry on my friend ~ — Corvus

I am waiting for a quote from his book or your understanding of the book.

Why was your definition not in the dictionary? — Corvus

The Google dictionary gives another definition as well. Anyway, I am happy to call myself a person or agent. I already defined what I mean by agent anyway. Let's put this aside and focus on your understanding of Hume's works.

The Google dictionary gives another definition as well. — MoK

I don't trust the big companies. They usually have lot of false info too. The sole purpose of these large business are making profits, not pursuit of truths.

Anyway, I am happy to call myself a person or agent. — MoK

Stick with person mate. We need to stick to common language which delivers the clearest meanings. Not cooked up jargons especially in philosophical discussion where clarity is the most critical element of the subject.

Let's put this aside and focus on your understanding of Hume's works. — MoK

I have read enough of Hume. I have a wall of the other books I am reading, and have no time to read Hume again. It is you who seems in desperate need to reading Hume, because you keep asking the questions which the answers all laid out in Hume's books written almost 300 years ago.

Any questions on Hume's topics? Start a new OP.

I have read enough of Hume. I have a wall of the other books I am reading, and have no time to read Hume again. It is you who seems in desperate need to reading Hume, because you keep asking the questions which the answers all laid out in Hume's books written almost 300 years ago. — Corvus

So you cannot report your understanding of his work yet claiming that he addressed my questions?

So you cannot report your understanding of his work yet claiming that he addressed my questions? — MoK

Will discuss about Hume with you, if you start a new OP on the topic. Discussing Hume in here would be likely grossly off-topic.

Any questions on Hume's topics? Start a new topic. — Corvus

I am not an expert on his work so please feel free to open a new thread and I would be happy to join.

Will discuss about Hume with you, if you start a new OP on the topic. Discussing Hume in here would be likely grossly off-topic — Corvus

It is off-topic on this thread! It is not off-topic on the other thread!

I am not an expert on his work so please feel free to open a new thread and I would be happy to join. — MoK

You don't need to be an expert to be able to create a new OP on Hume. ^_^

I am not familiar with his work so I don't even know how to start a new thread on the topic. So please, open a new thread and I would be happy to join you there.

I am not an expert on Hume either.  I just read some parts of his books, and agreed with some of his points. 

We read the original works be it Hume, Kant or Nietzsche, so we could try to find the parts which resonate with our own ideas on understanding the world.   The readings would be pointless, if we just read them, and parrot them away as if they are the holy grail verses from the Bible.

The original classic works are being read by the contemporary readers like us, because we would like to find the resonating points with our own ideas on interpreting and understanding the world, truth, mind and knowledge, which could be achieved by our own interpretations.

One of the ideal original thinkers, who is good for our own creative interpretation, is Nietzsche, because his works are written in poetic sarcasms and metaphors and rhetoric in large part.

More terse writers such as Kant or Hume wouldn't allow that kind of freedom for creative interpretation.  But still, the bottom line is, without your own interpretations and resonations, the original works would be of little value for spending time on readings.  That is just my opinion.  You are free to disagree.

But going back to the OP, the suggestion for a new OP was made purely due to the nature of your questions directed at me.  I just thought the answers are all in Hume's work.  Why not read them, and save time?  After that, if your mind is still filled with lingering interests and curiosities on his work and thought, then why not start an OP to discuss with more members who are the actual experts?

It was just a suggestion. Not a plea or request.  Now you have two good OPs to concentrate on.   After that, if you still feel you would be interested in discussing Hume's work, then let me know exactly what area of his philosophy you are interested in.  We could work out then on the ideal title of the new topic you might want to launch. :)

Although I sometimes quote Hume's ideas, neither I am an expert, nor my main interest lies in his philosophy. I am just a casual reader.

I am afraid that I am so busy with too many things right now. I am not even sure if Hume's works are relevant here. You are more knowledgeable than me and if you think that his work is relevant then opening a new thread is due to you.

You are a busy man. OK no probs mate. I don't think Hume is directly linked to the OP. So no worries.

As I said, the only reason I quoted Hume was because you asked me, if I am an agent. Whenever someone asks me what I am, my answer has always been, a bundle of perception. Because that is what I believe who I am.

Ok, no problem, and I hope we can discuss other topics elsewhere. Have a good time mate!