Hume Reason of Animals

Hume begins this section by stating that all our reasonings concerning matters of fact are founded on a species of Analogy, which leads us to expect from any cause the same events, which we have observed to result from similar causes. Where the causes are entirely similar, the analogy is perfect, and the inference, drawn from it, is regarded as certain and conclusive. He states that animals as well as humans learn many things from experience, and infer, that the same events will always follow from the same causes. He says that animals can be trained using rewards and punishment to go against their natural instincts. Animals infer some facts beyong their senses and this inference is founded on by past experiences. But he also says that an animal will answer to their name when called upon by a human using a different voice than they have heard, and know they are being called and not another animal. Hume suggests that Nature must have given some other principle of more general application to these animals. And not only the animals, but children and men also are endowed with this principle. If what we infer is from cause and effect, then why can we understand certain senses when the senses are not exactly the same? Hume says animals and humans are also endowed with certain instincts that let them know how to raise thier young or stay away from fire, so not only is cause and effect the only way to understand. Hume does not say this is the action of the soul, he is vague in describing and naming the principle that he says Nature has provided for the animals. But can't this just be the soul that Descartes was talking about, and it is just a question of semantics?