Arguments of Hume's views of miracles

• Hume: "A miracle is a violation of a law of nature by a God or a spirit."
    > Ward: "...totally unworkable definition."

1.

• Laws of nature didn't exist in people's minds before Isaac Newton.
• Ancient world + Bible authors had evidence to support things happening our of the ordinary.
• Deterministic and probabalistic laws:
  D: If you do X, Y will happen.
  P: If I do X, Y will probably happen.

2.

• Attacks Hume for setting up miracles to fail.
    > Felt by definition, miracles can't happen.
• 'De dictor' = miracles
• 'De re' = reality

• Do not multiply entities beyond necessity.

OR

• The simplest explanation is usually the best.
• 

• Hume originally says we should not assume there is a link between cause and effect.
    > Experience.
• However, contradicts himself:
    > In laws of nature there must be a link between cause and effect.
• Double standard.
• 

• Agreed with Hume's point of view of miracles but admitted it had significant weaknesses.
• Evidence for miracles = indirect.
    > Why should we believe small evidence for miracles over large evidence against.
• If you witness a miracle and search for a reason, but can't find any other explantion, then why shouldn't you just claim it as a miracle?

• Accepts that Hume incorporates criteria generally used for the assessment of testimony.
• However, finds Hume to be far too imprecise.
• Suggests two principles in support of miracles:
    > Principle of Credulity - what one seems to perceive is probably the case.
    > Principle of Testimony - it is reasonable to believe that the experiences of others are probably as reported.
• "Most alleged miracles do not give rise to conflicts."
• Evidence types:
  1. Memories.
  2. Testimonies.
  3. Physical traces.
  4. Natural law.

• Deist view.
• Rejects the idea that God directly intervenes in the world.
    > Therefore, rejects the existence of miracles.
• "The world as a whole [is] a single act of God."
• Thefore, He would not undermine the natural laws He created by intervening in the world.
• An omnibenevolent God would not perform trivial miracles.

• If miracles violate laws of nature, depends what laws are.
    > Laws of nature = probabalistic not deterministic  > theoretically possible for them to be broken.
      > Inductive.
• Swinburne's suggestions of good indirect evidence:
    > Memory
    > Testimony (principles of credulity and testimony)
    > Physical traces
• Anti-realist view.
    > Miracles are just how you perceive things from your form of life (redefinition of what miracle means).
• Direct evidence.
    > Flew.