Hume and miracles
- Created by: meganmiltonn
- Created on: 09-03-16 11:31
View mindmap
- David Hume and Miracles
- Hume was a Scottish philosopher who described his opinions of miracles in his essay 'Of Miracles' in 'An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding'
- He stated that believing in miracles was irrational because it was highly improbable and lacked evidence
- He defined a miracle as: "a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition (will) of Deity"
- He believed that natural laws had been proven as constant and unchanging, therefore, they are very improbable and unlikely to be broken
- He said that it will always be more likely that the witness to a miracle is mistaken or lying
- Hume's argument is a priori argument because he establishes the unlikelihood of miracles on the basis of definitions of miracles and natural laws
- The improbability of a miracle does not mean that it could never happen, Hume has not proved that they do not happen, only that it is improbable
- Hume gave 4 a posteriori (from experience) reasons for why there is inadequate evidence of miracles:
- 1. Miracles are never witnessed by a sufficient number of people and are not witnessed by people with "unanswered good sense, education and learning"
- 2. Miracles are often witnessed by religious believers who are unreliable witnesses because their faith leads them to naturally want to see miracles
- 3. Miracles are witnessed in "ignorant and barbarous nations"
- 4. Different religions all claim that miracles prove the 'truth' of their beliefs, but all religions have different understandings
- Hume defines miracles as an event which breaks the laws of nature (although he believes it's near to impossible and irrational to believe)
Comments
No comments have yet been made