David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
International Philosophical Quarterly 48 (3):371-379 (2008)
Hume’s destructive account of miracles has been thought by many to exclude the possibility of rationally accepting testimony to supernatural events. Here I argue that even if one grants that his argument works with respect to testimony about miracles, it does not succeed in showing that all testimony to the supernatural is inadmissible, since room is left open for religious experiences, especially those of an intersubjective kind, to function as evidence. If this is so, there is new reason to think that his exclusion of miracle claims might be unwarranted
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
S. Mark Heim (2000). Saving the Particulars: Religious Experience and Religious Ends. Religious Studies 36 (4):435-453.
Keith Ward (1985). Miracles and Testimony. Religious Studies 21 (2):131 - 145.
Matthew C. Bagger (1997). Hume and Miracles. Journal of the History of Philosophy 35 (2):237 - 251.
Chris Slupik (1995). A New Interpretation of Hume's 'Of Miracles'. Religious Studies 31 (4):517 - 536.
Lloyd F. Bitzer (1998). The "Indian Prince" in Miracle Arguments of Hume and His Predecessors and Early Critics. Philosophy and Rhetoric 31 (3):175-230.
Robert Hambourger (1980). Belief in Miracles and Hume's Essay. Noûs 14 (4):587-604.
George I. Mavrodes (1998). David Hume and the Probability of Miracles. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 43 (3):167-182.
Robert J. Fogelin (2003). A Defense of Hume on Miracles. Princeton Univ Pr.
Tony Pitson (2006). George Campbell's Critique of Hume on Testimony. Journal of Scottish Philosophy 4 (1):1-15.
Rodolphe Calin (2005). The Exception of Testimony. Levinas Studies 1:73-97.
Ruth Weintraub (1996). The Credibility of Miracles. Philosophical Studies 82 (3):359 - 375.
Linda Zagzebski (2011). First Person and Third Person Reasons and Religious Epistemology. European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 3 (2):285 - 304.
Rodney D. Holder (1998). Hume on Miracles: Bayesian Interpretation, Multiple Testimony, and the Existence of God. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49 (1):49-65.
Morgan Luck (2007). Supernatural Miracles and Religious Inclusiveness. Sophia 46 (3):287 - 293.
Added to index2011-01-09
Total downloads16 ( #116,466 of 1,410,080 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #57,890 of 1,410,080 )
How can I increase my downloads?