British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49 (1):49-65 (1998)
|Abstract||Hume's argument concerning miracles is interpreted by making approximations to terms in Bayes's theorem. This formulation is then used to analyse the impact of multiple testimony. Individual testimonies which are ‘non-miraculous’ in Hume's sense can in principle be accumulated to yield a high probability both for the occurrence of a single miracle and for the occurrence of at least one of a set of miracles. Conditions are given under which testimony for miracles may provide support for the existence of God.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Elliott Sober (2004). A Modest Proposal. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 68 (2):487–494.
Richard Otte (1996). Mackie's Treatment of Miracles. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 39 (3):151 - 158.
Jake H. O'Connell (2013). Divine Hiddenness: Would More Miracles Solve the Problem? Heythrop Journal 54 (2):261-267.
Travis Dumsday (2008). Religious Experience. International Philosophical Quarterly 48 (3):371-379.
Jordan Howard Sobel (1987). On the Evidence of Testimony for Miracles: A Bayesian Interpretation of David Hume's Analysis. Philosophical Quarterly 37 (147):166-186.
Richard Otte (2004). Review of Fogelin, A Defense of Hume on Miracles. [REVIEW] Hume Studies 30 (1):165-68.
Michael Almeida (2007). Martin on Miracles. Philo 10 (1):27-34.
John Earman (2000). Hume's Abject Failure: The Argument Against Miracles. Oxford University Press.
Chris Slupik (1995). A New Interpretation of Hume's 'Of Miracles'. Religious Studies 31 (4):517 - 536.
Michael Levine (1997). Bayesian Analyses of Hume's Argument Concerning Miracles. Philosophy and Theology 10 (1):101-106.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads110 ( #5,029 of 549,087 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #15,152 of 549,087 )
How can I increase my downloads?