337. Laws of nature are unqualified habits of expectation.
338. Experience, according to his account of it, cannot be a parent of knowledge.
339. His attitude towards doctrine of thinking substance.
340. As to Immateriality of the Soul, he plays off Locke and Berkeley against each other, and proves Berkeley a Spinozist.
341. Causality of spirit treated in the same way.
342. Disposes of ‘personal’ identity by showing contradictions in Locke’s account of it.
343. Yet can only account for it as a ‘fiction’ by supposing ideas which with him are impossible.
344. In origin this ‘fiction’ the same as that of ‘Body’.
345. Possibility of such fictitious ideas implies refutation of Hume’s doctrine.