Oxford University Press (2000)
|Abstract||This vital study offers a new interpretation of Hume's famous "Of Miracles," which notoriously argues against the possibility of miracles. By situating Hume's popular argument in the context of the 18th century debate on miracles, Earman shows Hume's argument to be largely unoriginal and chiefly without merit where it is original. Yet Earman constructively conceives how progress can be made on the issues that Hume's essay so provocatively posed about the ability of eyewitness testimony to establish the credibility of marvelous and miraculous events.|
|Buy the book||$79.81 used (28% off) $110.00 new $110.00 direct from Amazon Amazon page|
|Call number||B1499.M5.E37 2000|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Richard Otte (1996). Mackie's Treatment of Miracles. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 39 (3):151 - 158.
Peter Harrison (2001). Hume's Abject Failure: The Argument Against Miracles (Review). Journal of the History of Philosophy 39 (4):592-594.
Richard Swinburne (2002). Review: Hume's Abject Failure: The Argument Against Miracles. [REVIEW] Mind 111 (441):95-99.
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.
Michael Levine (1997). Bayesian Analyses of Hume's Argument Concerning Miracles. Philosophy and Theology 10 (1):101-106.
M. Jacovides (2008). Review Of: Hume, Holism, and Miracles; Hume's Abject Failure; A Defense of Hume on Miracles. [REVIEW] Philosophical Review 117 (1):142-147.
Chris Slupik (1995). A New Interpretation of Hume's 'Of Miracles'. Religious Studies 31 (4):517 - 536.
Richard Otte (2004). Review of Fogelin, A Defense of Hume on Miracles. [REVIEW] Hume Studies 30 (1):165-68.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads274 ( #575 of 549,087 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #12,372 of 549,087 )
How can I increase my downloads?