...Analysis of David Hume's “Of Miracles” A.) Violations of Nature do not exist. All miracles are violations of nature. Therefore, miracles do not exist. B.) This is valid deductive argument given by Hume. However, the argument is unsound because it is has a false premise and a false conclusion. Either of the premises have to be false, both cannot be true at the same time, and the conclusion is false. C.) Hume in his argument for identifying miracles is an example of Begging the Question. This can be found two paragraphs before Part 2 in “Of Miracles”. This is when Hume is talking about uniform experience. (Last 2 sentences) Hume. If we take what Hume says that uniform experience is against miracles is to basically say that the miracles,...
Words: 613 - Pages: 3
...,ASSESS HUME’S REASONS FOR REJECTING MIRACLES Hume’s rejection of miracles comes from his theory that there are laws of nature which are based on past experience, a posteriori, and appear to be unvarying and universal. During this essay I will put forward Hume’s approach before assessing his reasons for the rejections of miracles and what other philosophers have said about his rejection. According to the dictionary definition, a miracle is defined as: ‘a highly improbable or extraordinary event that is not explicable by natural laws and is considered to be divine’. Hume’s definition of a miracle is not that different from the dictionary definition, defining them as: ‘a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the Deity, or by the interposition of some invisible agent.’ He puts forward two separate arguments against miracles; one being a priori and the other being a posteriori. The first of his arguments is based on the lack of probability and is a priori. Hume argues that miracles are violations of the laws of nature and a ‘firm and unalterable experience’ has established these laws of nature. He did not deny that these events, miracles, would not happen; but instead said that they are the least likely event possible, and improbable events need witnesses of higher credibility than witnesses required for more probable events. Hume argued that even the most impressive testimony will at most counterbalance the unlikeliness of the event. Clearly, a serious...
Words: 1207 - Pages: 5
...Comment on the view that arguments against miracles are stronger than those arguments in support of them David Hume proposed his definition of a miracle but in spite of this Hume had criticisms claiming that it was not reasonable to believe in miracles as the evidence was totally unreliable. He stated two weaknesses to the belief in miracles: 1) Based on our large experience of natural laws, it makes more sense to say that there is some other explanation for example that we cannot know every natural law. For example, had Jesus been crucified in our time and come back to life after three days. Overall this could be regarded as a miracle today but it might not be considered as a miracle in the future 2) The evidence of miracles often comes from the testimony of others. We should not rely on such second-hand accounts, because accounts of others cannot be trusted. For example in Fatima thousands of witnesses claimed to have seen the sun spin and fall out of the sky however the witnesses may have been deceived because of their excitement. Firstly, Hume challenged the testimonies of miraculous occurrences on the ground that there were not enough reliable witnesses. There have never been enough a miracle which has been witnessed by a sufficiently large number reliable, objective witnesses. For example there will never be a large enough amounts of educated, reasonable, trustworthy and respected men for us to believe their testimony the resurrection of Jesus was seen by...
Words: 1540 - Pages: 7
...Abbas Ali David Hume and the Fallacy (Philosophy) of Religion David Hume is considered the greatest philosopher Britain has produced and an intellectual hero to many atheists. His arguments against religion are clear, incisive and devastating. However, some people have misconstrued his agnosticism to represent faith and claim that while Hume challenged conventional religion, he himself believed in God. In this paper I will attempt to refute some of these claims by briefly highlighting some of Hume’s most compelling arguments against religion and showing how they leave little room for belief. I will also delve into some of the context surrounding Hume’s work to show how speaking against religion was a dangerous game in those times and restricted Hume’s ability to speak freely. Some of the primary sources used for this paper include Hume’s most famous works on religion, including The Natural History of Religion and Dialogues concerning Natural Religion. Secondary and tertiary sources include scholarly critiques of Hume’s texts as well as reviews and journals interpreting his work one way or another. To start with, lets have a look at an excerpt from, The Natural History of Religion, published in 1757. In the following passage, Hume summarizes his views on religion as “sick men’s dreams”: What a noble privilege is it of human reason to attain the knowledge of the supreme Being; and, from the visible works of nature, be enabled to infer so sublime a principle as its supreme...
Words: 1858 - Pages: 8
...A miracle, as a broad definition, is an act of God that “transgresses the laws of nature” (David Hume), an act that seems to defy all rational. For many this offers strong evidence for the existence of God, as these inexplicable events must have a cause, that of a transcendent, metaphysical being. However, for others, most notably David Hume, miracles are a logical impossibility, an oxymoron if you will. He tried to prove, through a priori and a posterior reasoning that miracles, because of their metaphysical origin, cannot be what people claim them to be (intervention by God). Problems with the law of nature to language problems with the way miracles are experienced and reported provide ammunition for those that agree with the assumption in the title. By defining what miracles are and then exploring the criticisms and counter criticisms for these definitions we should arrive at a conclusion as to whether miracles, in the sense they are defined, are possible. Brian Davis proposed that there were two different types of miracles, the essential difference being the varying degree of possible divine intervention that can be attributed to the event. Strong Miracles are events that can only be attributed to God – he is intervening in the world to change the course of history. This may be, as Hume suggested, a “transgression of the laws of nature by a particular violation of the Deity, or by the interposition of some invisible agent”. However, Humey boy took issue with strong miracles...
Words: 2011 - Pages: 9
...Hume and miracles Examine Hume’s views on miracles. Hume rejected the idea of miracles due to his belief they were beyond the realms of reasonable belief there are other interpretations of the events which would be more likely. Hume believes wise and sensible people will form their beliefs on evidence. Therefore it must be more likely that it is true than it being false before they believe it. Hume argued we should weigh up the evidence in the case of miracles. We should look at which more likely; natural rules will have held good, or is it more likely that a miracle will have taken place. By Hume’s thinking our past experiences have shown us that for example, we can’t turn water into wine, we can’t rise from the dead, we can’t walk on water, therefore the whole weight of past experiences we have had bears this out. This leads to us being sceptical when it comes when looking at reports that something different has happened. You have several choices when/if someone tells you they’ve witnessed a miracle. You could believe what the person is telling you, if you know the person well enough and know they usually tell the truth then you would do so. However, you could believe that the person is mistaken or deceiving you on purpose. For Hume, he argued that a reasonable person would choose the most likely of the choices, even though it may be unlikely that the person is deceiving you and unlikely that they’ve made a mistake it will always be more unlikely that a miracle has actually...
Words: 1496 - Pages: 6
...that one should never be convinced to the occurrence of a miracle based on the testimony but by the evidence of rightful experiences. Hume described a miracle is a violation of the laws of nature; and as a firm and unalterable experience has established these laws, the proof against a miracle, from the very nature of the fact, is as entire as any argument from experience can possibly be imagined. For example, stones that drink milk - found to be faked and a woman miraculously escaped crushing by a truck in Nagpur. Both the incidents happened in India, where religious beliefs take hierarchy over the scientifically proved facts. First example, stones that drink milk. This rumor became a viral talk that spread all over the country through media. In return, the public thronged to the temple to see the idol of god drinking milk. Number of devotees who visit the temple has drastically increased within days with so many offerings left at temple in the form of money and gold to the god. In fact, it is proved to be just a falsehood testimony by the illiterate people who thought that the god himself made his presence on earth. Scientists explained it as caused by capillary action of the material of the statue that absorbed the milk offered by the devotees. Second example, a woman miraculously escapes the death crush by a truck in Nagpur, India. It is a true testimony which on listening no one would believe. This is really a miracle and it has evidence to prove. Here’s the link to prove that...
Words: 525 - Pages: 3
...Religious Philosophers and Speculative Atheists Interpretations of Hume's philosophy of religion are often made against the background of more general interpretations of his philosophical intentions. From this perspective, it is not unusual to view Hume's views on religion in terms of the skepticism and naturalism that features prominently in his Treatise of Human Nature (1739-40), his first and most ambitious philosophical work. According to the account that is now widely accepted in the scholarly literature, Hume removed almost all the material in the Treatise that was concerned with religion because he was anxious to avoid causing any “offence” among the orthodox. In his later works, beginning with an Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding (1748), Hume began to present his views on this subject in a more substantial and direct manner. This culminates in his Natural History of Religion (1757) and Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (1779; published posthumously) – both of which are entirely taken up with philosophical issues in religion. The linkage between these various works, on this account, is that the later writings on religion are simply an extension and application of the sceptical and naturalistic principles that Hume developed in his earlier writings. While it is certainly true that there is an intimate connection between Hume's scepticism and naturalism and his irreligious objectives and orientation, it is not evident that this relationship should be understood...
Words: 1814 - Pages: 8
...Asses Humes reason for rejecting miracles. (35) Hume defines a miracle as a transgression of a natural law by a particular volition of the deity. This does not imply that a miracle is an extraordinary event but it is one that breaks the natural law and that it is brought about by the action of God. Other two definitions would be that a miracle is an event that has religious significance and this does not need to have broken the laws of nature to be regarded as a miracle but it needs to reveal something about God. The last definition of a miracle is a view of Thomas Aquinas who defines miracles as an event caused by God. In this essay I will be discussing why Hume rejects miracles and arguments for and against his theories. Hume was an empiricist, so he believed that it was more likely that the report of a miracle was mistaken than the laws of nature were violated. He did not say that miracles did not happen, but that it would be impossible to prove them. Hume’s argument is based on the principle of induction, which is the suggestion that future events will take place based on previous evidence. This is because evidence from people’s experience of observing the world showed the laws of nature to be fixed and unvarying. For example, the sun has risen every day in the past, so it is very likely that it will rise again and not stand still in the sky. However, Hume did accept that whatever happened countless times in the past did not guarantee such would happen again in...
Words: 703 - Pages: 3
...2001 1. (a) What are the key features of the design argument for the existence of God? (10 marks) (b) Identify the strengths of this argument. To what extent are these strengths more convincing than its weaknesses? (10 marks) 2. (a) Describe the main strengths and weaknesses of the cosmological argument for the existence of God. (14 marks) (b) To what extent do the weaknesses of this argument limit its effectiveness? (6 marks) 3. (a) Examine the characteristics of BOTH a religious and a scientific interpretation of the origins of the universe. (14 marks) (b) Comment on the view that the differences between these interpretations rule out any major disagreement between them. (6 marks) 4. (a) What do religious believers mean by the ‘problem of suffering’? (5 marks) (b) Select any TWO theodicies and consider how far they offer solutions to this problem. (15 marks) 5. (a) Examine TWO philosophical reasons for belief in miracles. (6 marks) (b) Outline at least TWO problems with belief in miracles. (8 marks) (c) Consider the claim that there are no acceptable solutions to these problems. (6 marks) 2002 1. (a) Outline the design argument for the existence of God. (7 marks) (b) ‘The design argument fails because of its weaknesses.’ Examine and comment on this claim. (13 marks) 2. (a) What are the key ideas...
Words: 3353 - Pages: 14
...for this course. This may sound ignorant but I had never really given any thought to my worldview. If asked what I believed about something I would give my belief and that was that. What exactly is a worldview? A worldview is what it sounds like. It is the way one may see the world or as Nash puts it in his book Life’s Ultimate Questions “the sum total of a person’s answers to the most important questions in life(392).” Everyone has a worldview whether we realize it or not. How does one get their worldview? Our education, our upbringing, the culture we live in, the books we read, the media and movies we watch, all can help shape our worldview. Nash says, “Worldviews contain at least five clusters of beliefs, namely, beliefs about God, metaphysics (ultimate reality), epistemology (knowledge), ethics and human nature (14).” Using these five sections I will share my worldview. In general my worldview is a Christian one. I believe that there is one God who exists in three forms who created the Heavens and the earth. In the Bible Genesis 1:1 tells of how God is the beginning of everything; he created the heavens and the earth out of nothing. God did create the world and everything in it. He not only created everything in but he created it and said it was good. Since God created everything in the world I believe he can and does control the world. I do believe in miracles and believe that we as humans where put here on earth to worship the on true God. Where does Epistemology...
Words: 2495 - Pages: 10
...person interprets an event as an act of God and another does not? Hume Created a case against miracles saying not that they do not happen, but that it would be impossible to prove them – he is an empiricist (bases knowledge on experience). A miracle is ‘A transgression of a law of nature brought about by a particular violation of a Deity’. Nothing that can happen in nature should be called a miracle. Had 5 arguments against believing in miracles; one philosophical and four psychological. Not enough evidence of miracles to outweigh our general experience. Rationality requires that belief is proportionate to evidence. ‘A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence’. Insufficient witnesses – must be witnessed by a highly credible, good sense, well-educated person. How much education is ‘enough’? The testimonies usually came from ignorant and barbarous nations. People tend to exaggerate and are drawn towards the sensational and drama. The often have a desire to believe. There are conflicting claims that cancel each other out. Hick’s response would be that all religions lead to one God though. Hume will never be fully able to fully prove to believers that miracles do not occur, as the definition of a miracle implies divine activity and this is ultimately beyond our earthly considerations. But sceptics and believers can be said to both agree that the occurrence of miracles must be a very rare event. Critque of Hume Hick would say that we do not know the laws of...
Words: 961 - Pages: 4
...Do religious miracles happen for real? This very question has been contested time and time again throughout history of humankind. While there is numerous human testimonies that claim to have witnessed religious miracles take place right before their eyes, there are also contradictory human testimonies that appear to argue otherwise. It is because of this very gridlock in arguments that I wish to analyze both sides to this question via the use of two highly respected and intellectual philosophers—David Hume and Phaedo from Plato. While Phaedo appears to be on the side that inexplicitly accepts the possibility of miracles, David Hume appears to make a case around reason and common sense that persuasively argues otherwise. According to the philosopher, David Hume, in his An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding,...
Words: 1120 - Pages: 5
...b) To what extent was Hume successful in his critique of the cosmological argument? [10]Hume makes some very important challenges to the Cosmological argument which some believe count decisively against it. One of the key areas he calls into question is the argument’s dependence upon what Leibniz termed the principle of sufficient reason. In this principle an adequate explanation must be a total explanation. The universe requires an explanation of itself as a whole. But many would say, as Russell later told Copleston: “Then I can only say that you’re looking for something which can’t be got, and which one ought not to expect to get.” If you have explained each individual element of a series any explanation of the series as a whole would seem to be superfluous, and besides he says that ‘the whole’ doesn’t really exist anyway – it is ‘an arbitrary act of mind’ that makes things into wholes. What we term the ‘whole universe’ in modern physics may be only a bubble in a larger reality that we have no way of grasping. Also if we are only entitled to talk about causes when we have had experience of them, then this argument would seem to be over-stretching itself in speculating upon what it cannot know. On the other hand, there is of course a problem with stopping at a certain point and saying that we should seek no further explanation, in that it is a basic presupposition of all scientific work. However, even though a principle of rationality is that we can find an explanation for...
Words: 2857 - Pages: 12
...Philosophy Open access to the SEP is made possible by a world-wide funding initiative. Please Read How You Can Help Keep the Encyclopedia Free Author & Citation Info | Friends PDF Preview | InPho Search | PhilPapers Bibliography Kant and Hume on Morality First published Wed Mar 26, 2008; substantive revision Sun Aug 12, 2012 The ethics of Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) is often contrasted with that of David Hume (1711–1776). Hume's method of moral philosophy is experimental and empirical; Kant emphasizes the necessity of grounding morality in a priori principles. Hume says that reason is properly a “slave to the passions,” while Kant bases morality in his conception of a reason that is practical in itself. Hume identifies such feelings as benevolence and generosity as proper moral motivations; Kant sees the motive of duty—a motive that Hume usually views as a second best or fall back motive—as uniquely expressing an agent's commitment to morality and thus as conveying a special moral worth to actions. Although there are many points at which Kant's and Hume's ethics stand in opposition to each other, there are also important connections between the two. Kant shared some important assumptions about morality and motivation with Hume, and had, early in his career, been attracted to and influenced by the sentimentalism of Hume and other British moralists. The aim of this essay is not to compare Hume and Kant on all matters ethical. Instead, we examine...
Words: 24372 - Pages: 98
