A Defense of Hume on Miracles

Princeton Univ Pr (2003)
Abstract
Arguing that criticisms have--from the very start--rested on misreadings, Fogelin begins by providing a narrative of the way Hume’s argument actually unfolds. What Hume’s critics (and even some of his defenders) have failed to see is that Hume’s primary argument depends on fixing the appropriate standards of evaluating testimony presented on behalf of a miracle. Given the definition of a miracle, Hume quite reasonably argues that the standards for evaluating such testimony must be extremely high. Hume then argues that, as a matter of fact, no testimony on behalf of a religious miracle has even come close to meeting the appropriate standards for acceptance. (publisher, edited)
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Buy the book $12.90 used (64% off)   $22.00 new (38% off)    Amazon page
ISBN(s) 0691114307  
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 11,392
External links
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
Peter Millican (2011). Twenty Questions About Hume's “Of Miracles”. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 68:151-192.
Elliott Sober (2004). A Modest Proposal. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 68 (2):487–494.
Elliott Sober (2004). A Modest Proposal. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 68 (2):487-494.
Similar books and articles
Matthew C. Bagger (1997). Hume and Miracles. Journal of the History of Philosophy 35 (2):237 - 251.
Ruth Weintraub (1996). The Credibility of Miracles. Philosophical Studies 82 (3):359 - 375.
John Earman (1993). Bayes, Hume, and Miracles. Faith and Philosophy 10 (3):293-310.
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.

Added to index

2012-06-16

Total downloads

0

Recent downloads (6 months)

0

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.