the philosophy of david hume was for a long time conceived as a skeptical philosophy. the naturalistic approach aims, about this point, provides new meanings to the affirmative aspect of his philosophy, by showing that hume was interested in apply the experimental method in the study of human nature. then, his philosophy could be seen as a construction - over naturalistic basis - of a theory of knowledge and human nature. some critics like kevin meeker intent to claim that the skeptic conclusions, present in hume’s works makes impossible such a naturalistic view, prevailing after all the skeptical conclusion of the impossibility of knowledge. this enquiry wants to show, by an analysis of hume’s texts, that the conceptions of knowledge, naturalism and even this conception of skepticism, applied to hume’s philosophy is mistaken, and that the naturalistic outcome makes more sense, among the possible interpretations of hume’s philosophy.