What did David Hume think about miracles?
According to Hume, the evidence in favor of a miracle, even when that is provided by the strongest possible testimony, will always be outweighed by the evidence for the law of nature which is supposed to have been violated. Considerable controversy surrounds the notion of a violation of natural law.
What is Hume's point about miracles and design theory?
Hume states that a miracle is “a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the deity or by the interposition of some invisible agent”. By this, Hume means to suggest that a miracle is a breaking of a law of nature by the choice and action of a God or supernatural power.
What did David Hume argue for?
Beginning with A Treatise of Human Nature (1739–40), Hume strove to create a naturalistic science of man that examined the psychological basis of human nature. Hume argued against the existence of innate ideas, positing that all human knowledge derives solely from experience.
When did Hume write of miracles?
1748"Of Miracles" is the title of Section X of David Hume's An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding (1748).
What is miracle According to philosophy?
A miracle (from the Latin mirari, to wonder), at a first and very rough approximation, is an event that is not explicable by natural causes alone. A reported miracle excites wonder because it appears to require, as its cause, something beyond the reach of human action and natural causes.
What is the nature of miracles?
The source of miracles is always a divine, spiritual, supernatural, sacred, or numinous power that may be conceived in personal form (e.g., God, gods, spirits) or impersonal form (e.g., mana or magic).
What is the beliefs of David Hume?
His emphasis is on altruism: the moral sentiments that he claims to find in human beings, he traces, for the most part, to a sentiment for and a sympathy with one's fellows. It is human nature, he holds, to laugh with the laughing and to grieve with the grieved and to seek the good of others as well as one's own.
What did David Hume say about the existence of God?
God is just an idea that cannot be rationalized through impressions. Through the character of Philo, Hume espoused his theory that man can't claim any rational views of God. For this reason, many link him to atheism, the lack of belief in the existence of God.
What is Hume's theory?
According to Hume's theory of the mind, the passions (what we today would call emotions, feelings, and desires) are impressions rather than ideas (original, vivid and lively perceptions that are not copied from other perceptions).
What is do you believe in miracles from?
"Do You Believe in Miracles" is a song by the British rock band Slade, released in 1985 as a single which was included on the band's studio/compilation album Crackers: The Christmas Party Album. It was written by lead vocalist Noddy Holder and bassist Jim Lea, and produced by John Punter.
What is the criteria for a miracle?
In the canonization process, a miracle almost always refers to the spontaneous and lasting remission of a serious, life-threatening medical condition. The healing must have taken place in ways that the best-informed scientific knowledge cannot account for and follow prayers to the holy person.
What are the elements of miracle?
In its most basic sense, a miracle is an unusual, unexpected, observable event brought about by direct divine intervention. The focus of this study is on the key conceptual, epistemological, and theological issues that this definition of the miraculous continues to raise.
What is the design argument for the existence of God?
argument from design, or teleological argument, Argument for the existence of God. According to one version, the universe as a whole is like a machine; machines have intelligent designers; like effects have like causes; therefore, the universe as a whole has an intelligent designer, which is God.
What is Hume's Fork and what is its significance for his epistemology?
The term 'Hume's Fork' refers to David Hume's epistemological theory that all concepts are divisible into two distinct categories: 'relations of ideas' and 'matters of fact', and that genuine knowledge may only be derived from the those concepts identified as the latter.
What is the criteria for a miracle?
In the canonization process, a miracle almost always refers to the spontaneous and lasting remission of a serious, life-threatening medical condition. The healing must have taken place in ways that the best-informed scientific knowledge cannot account for and follow prayers to the holy person.
What is Hume's maxim?
in Hume‟s famous „maxim‟: The plain consequence is (and it is a general maxim worthy of our attention), “That no. testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its. falsehood would be more miraculous, than the fact, which it endeavours to establish: And.
What did Hume say about miracles?
Hume defined a miracle as “a violation of the laws of nature” and then argued that since the laws of nature cannot be violated, miracles must be rejected. [5] . In response to this, J. L. Mackie said:
What was Hume's objection to miracles?
Among Hume’s many claims was his objection to miracles and miracle accounts. Hume believed that miracles, as violations of the laws of nature, were impossible and reports of them should not be believed. [3] Though this claim seems sensible to many, there is actually a very good reason to reject it. [4] . If we look at Hume’s definition of ...
Why is Hume's argument against miracles not a violation of the laws of nature?
Miracles are not violations of the laws of nature because miracles are not subject to the laws of nature. Starting from a false premise (miracles are violations of the laws of nature) Hume’s argument fails to confirm its conclusion (miracles are impossible).
What did David Hume believe?
What did David Hume believe? In general, Hume was a skeptic who demanded scientific evidence for any truth claim (see Empiricism or Scientism). [1] If it could not be confirmed through observation, experience, or by the senses, Hume argued that we had reason in the least to doubt it if not to reject it altogether. This foundational idea guided Hume to make several major controversial claims concerning reality. [2] Among Hume’s many claims was his objection to miracles and miracle accounts. Hume believed that miracles, as violations of the laws of nature, were impossible and reports of them should not be believed. [3]
Is Hume's definition of miracle correct?
Hume defined a miracle as “a violation of the laws of nature” and then argued that since the laws of nature cannot be violated, miracles must be rejected. [5] In response to this, J. L. Mackie said:
What does Hume say about miracles?
3) Hume also suggests that with all claims of miracles made, there is inadequate witness testimony. Witnesses must, according to Hume, be well educated and intelligent. They should have a reputation to lose and nothing to gain from their claim. There must be a “sufficient number” of witnesses in order for a claim to be considered. Hume also states that humans love the fantastic and want to believe in miracles, and believers desire to promote their religion. As a result, Hume argues that many, if not all, claims of miracles in current sources are inadequate and should be dismissed.
What is Hume's argument against miracles?
Hume states that a miracle is “a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the deity or by the interposition of some invisible agent”. By this, Hume means to suggest that a miracle is a breaking of a law ...
What does Hume mean by proportionality?
Hume sets up this definition in order to counter with five main arguments. 1) “A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence”. Here, Hume means to suggest that a wise man considers which side is supported by the most evidence. Everitt calls this the proportionality principle.
Is Ockham's Razor correct?
Hume here points to Ockham’s Razor as support for this, which basically states that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. In order for a miracle to be true, denial of the miracle would have to be more miraculous than its acceptance.
What does Hume say about miracles?
Hume argues that since miracles run contrary to man’s uniform experience of the laws of nature, no testimony can establish that a miracle has occurred unless “its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavors to establish.” {14} Although Hume makes it sound as though establishing one miracle would require an even greater miracle, all his statement really amounts to, as John Earman rightly notes, is that no testimony is good enough to establish that a miracle has occurred unless it’s sufficient to make the occurrence of the miracle more probable than not. {15}
What is Hume's argument against miracles?
Hume essentially “presents a two-pronged assault against miracles.” {2} He first argues that “a miracle is a violation of the laws of nature.”. But since “a firm and unalterable experience has established these laws, the proof against a miracle,” he says, “is as entire as any argument from experience can possibly be imagined.” {3} In other words, ...
How does Hume maintain that the uniform experience of mankind is against the occurrence of miracles?
Thus, the only way that Hume can maintain that the uniform experience of mankind is against the occurrence of miracles is by assuming that all miracle reports are false. But this assumption, as we’ll see, is completely untenable when miraculous events are attested by numerous, independent witnesses.
What is the most influential critique of Hume?
To conclude, although Hume’s critique of miracles is one of the most influential ever written, it really doesn’t stand up well under scrutiny. Indeed, John Earman concludes his devastating critique of Hume’s arguments by noting his astonishment at how well posterity has treated Hume’s essay, “given how completely the confection collapses under a little probing.” {22} Although Hume was doubtless a brilliant man, his critique of miracles is simply unconvincing.
What is Hume's premise?
Hume’s first premise assumes that there could not be miracles and his second premise is based on his distaste for the societies that report miracles. As a Christian examining these arguments, we find little of value to convince us to reject a biblical worldview saying that God can and has intervened in natural history to perform miracles.
What is Hume's critique of miracles?
Hume’s Critique of Miracles. Michael Gleghorn examines Hume’s influential critique of miracles and points out the major shortfalls in his argument. Hume’s first premise assumes that there could not be miracles and his second premis e is based on his distaste for the societies that report miracles. As a Christian examining these arguments, we find ...
Is Hume's view that a miracle has occurred possible?
But in Hume’s view this is virtually impossible. No testimony is really ever sufficient to establish that a miracle has occurred. And this is problematic. For it can be perfectly reasonable to accept a highly improbable event on the basis of human testimony. In fact, we do it all the time.
What are Hume's two other arguments?
What about Hume’s two other arguments: human tendency to crave the spectacular, and the assertion that many religious traditions claim the reality of miracles, thus nullifying Christianity’s claims.
How should we respond to Hume?
Whether or not you’re aware of Hume’s argument, you’ve probably encountered objections to miracles that follow a similar line of thinking . Or maybe you’ve wondered yourself about whether it’s reasonable to think Jesus really performed miracles.
How many supporting claims did Hume make?
Hume supported his primary argument with four supporting claims: No miracle has been attested by a sufficient number of educated and rational witnesses. There is a human tendency to believe the spectacular. Most reports of miracles occur among ignorant and barbarous people.
What are the miracles of Jesus?
You’ll learn more about the significance of Jesus’ miracles as a whole, as well as the meaning and purpose of each kind of miracle: 1 exorcisms 2 healings 3 raising the dead 4 nature miracles
What is Hume's worldview?
That is, Hume’s worldview—the worldview still dominant in our own time—assumes that the universe is a closed system of cause and effect. According to this worldview, because miracles are outside the realm of cause and effect, then miracles are impossible.
Why was Jesus executed?
18.3.3 §63), a probable reference to his miracles. The Babylonian Talmud claims Jesus was executed because he practiced magic and led Israel astray (b. Sanh. 43a).
What does the scientific method say about the events that occur outside the material world?
However, the scientific method has nothing to say about the events that occur outside the material world.
What does Hume think about miracles?
Hume thinks that they cannot, and indeed that no rational person would base belief in God on testimony that miracles have occurred. He says: “...therefore we may establish it as a maxim, that no human testimony can have such force as to prove a miracle, and make it a just foundation for any system of religion.”. (88)
Why is Hume skeptical of miracles?
In � II, Hume adds another reason to be skeptical about testimony about miracles, when he writes. “there is no testimony for any [miracles] ...that is not opposed by an infinite number of witnesses; so that not only the miracle destroys the credit of testimony, but the testimony destroys itself.
How do miracles justify religious belief?
1 The role of miracles in justifying religious belief. It is natural to think that miracles can, in principle, provide some evidence in favor of religious belief . Suppose that we think of a miracle as an event which is an exception to the laws of nature. Then, if we see such an event, we might be justified in thinking that it does not have ...
What is Hume's plausible answer?
Hume has a very plausible answer: “we may observe, that there is no species of reasoning more common, more useful, and even necessary to human life, than that which is derived from the testimony of men, and the reports of eye-witnesses and spectators. ... I shall not dispute about a word.
What is the problem with miracles?
The problem for the believer in miracles is that miracles, being departures from the laws of nature, seem to be exactly the sorts of events which we should not expect to happen. As Hume puts it:
What is Hume's first claim?
Hume’s first claim is that we should base belief on the available evidence:
When deciding whether to believe or disbelieve some proposition, should we weigh the evidence for and against it?
The general moral seems to be correct: when deciding whether to believe or disbelieve some proposition, we should weigh the evidence for and against it to see whether it makes the proposition or its negation more probable.
What was Hume's writing about?
Hume was writing before the middle of the 18 th Century about the basic rudiments of literary scholarship applied to the Bible. This "Biblical Criticism" is rejected by Christian Fundamentalists (they make up 25% of the population of the United States) and who reject all the scholarship that has followed for now more that two and a half centuries.
How do miracles destroy the credit of other religions?
The religions of ancient Rome, Turkey, Siam, and China cannot all be established on a solid foundation. Every supposed miracle is used to establish that particular tradition and therefore is an indirect attempt to destroy the credit of other religions. The miracles oppose each other in the same way as the testimony of witnesses at a trial may have their credit destroyed by the testimony of two others who show that the defendant was far away from the scene of the crime at the time it was committed.
What is the maxim of human testimony?
We ought not to make an exception for human testimony which itself has no necessary connection with any event. It is experience that gives us whatever confidence we have in human testimony: a tendency to remember, an inclination towards truth, and a provoking of shame when falsehood is detected. Yet we frequently hesitate to accept the reports of others: when witnesses contradict each other, when they are but few, when their character is questionable, when they can benefit from what they affirm, and when they speak with hesitation (or are too assertive). And there are other examples that diminish or destroy the force of any argument from human testimony.
Is there any proof of miracles?
98-99. No testimony for any miracle has ever amounted to probability, much less to proof. Even if it had, it would be opposed by another proof. Experience, which assures us of the laws of nature, alone gives authority to human testimony.
Is there a sufficient number of people of unquestioned good sense, education, learning, reputation and undoub?
First, in all history there never has been a sufficient number of people of unquestioned good sense, education, learning, reputation and undoubted integrity to persuade us that they were not deluding themselves or deceiving others. Full assurance in testimony depends on this.
Who is the philosopher who wrote the miracles summary?
Philosopher David Hume on miracles Summary. by Rev Dr Wally Shaw - a teacher and philosopher.
Who cured the blind man at Alexandria?
One of the best ever attested miracles was that of the historian Tacitus reporting that Vespasian cured a blind man at Alexandria by means of his spittle, a lame man by touching his foot, and both of them were acting in their obedience to a vision of the god Serapigrave's to come before the Emperor.
Why does Hume's probability math fail?
The reason that Hume’s probability math fails, is that modern probability (Bayesian probability) had not been developed in his time. Today we know that the correct formulation for the odds of such an event occurring is determined by:
What is a miracle?
Miracle: an effect or extraordinary event in the physical world that surpasses all known human or natural powers and is ascribed to a supernatural cause (Dictionary.com)
Is an event a miracle?
The event must be out of the common occurrence. Otherwise we could not distinguish the event as a miracle.
Can the odds of a miracle account be grossly balanced?
Now we can see that the odds for the miracle account can be grossly balanced, and a rational person could either accept or reject it depending on precisely how she estimates the probabilities.
Introduction
Hume’s Argument from The Laws of Nature
- What are we to say to Hume’s argument that “a miracle is a violation of the laws of nature” and that “the proof against a miracle…is as entire as any argument from experience can possibly be imagined”? First, we might question whether miracles should be defined as violations of the laws of nature. According to Christian philosopher Bill Craig, “An examination of the chief competing …
Hume’s Argument Against The Reliability of Human Testimony
- In Part II of “Of Miracles,” David Hume argues that there has never been the kind of testimony on behalf of miracles which would “amount to entire proof.”{9} He offers four reasons for this claim.{10} First, no miracle on record has a sufficient number of intelligent witnesses, of good moral character, who testify to a miraculous event that occurred in public and in a civilized part …
Hume and Probability Theory
- Hume argues that since miracles run contrary to man’s uniform experience of the laws of nature, no testimony can establish that a miracle has occurred unless “its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavors to establish.”{14} Although Hume makes it sound as though establishing one miracle would require an even greater miracl...