Journal of the History of Philosophy 35 (2):237 - 251 (1997)
"Hume and Miracles" relates Hume’s essay "Of Miracles" to the Port-Royal ’Logic’ and John Locke. It argues that Hume did not, as is often supposed, intend to suggest that well-attested miracle reports defeat themselves by undermining the laws of nature they defy. Instead, Hume argues that the specifically ’religious’ nature of the testimony relating to miracle claims rules out their acceptance because of the frequency of fraud in religious matters. Hume’s views are too austere because one might wish to reject the religious interpretation of an anomaly while accepting that the anomaly occurred
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Bayesian Analyses of Hume's Argument Concerning Miracles.Michael Levine - 1997 - Philosophy and Theology 10 (1):101-106.
Mackie's Treatment of Miracles.Richard Otte - 1996 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 39 (3):151-158.
Hume on Miracles: Bayesian Interpretation, Multiple Testimony, and the Existence of God.Rodney D. Holder - 1998 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49 (1):49-65.
Review Of: Hume, Holism, and Miracles; Hume's Abject Failure; A Defense of Hume on Miracles. [REVIEW]M. Jacovides - 2008 - Philosophical Review 117 (1):142-147.
A New Interpretation of Hume's 'Of Miracles'.Chris Slupik - 1995 - Religious Studies 31 (4):517 - 536.
Hume's Abject Failure: The Argument Against Miracles.John Earman - 2000 - Oxford University Press.
Review of Fogelin, A Defense of Hume on Miracles. [REVIEW]Richard Otte - 2004 - Hume Studies 30 (1):165-68.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads490 ( #3,509 of 2,158,680 )
Recent downloads (6 months)7 ( #46,171 of 2,158,680 )
How can I increase my downloads?