Robert A. Larmer
University of New Brunswick
In his The Everlasting Check: Hume on Miracles, Alexander George claims to provide readers with a single unified interpretation of Hume’s ‘Of Miracles’ that demonstrates Hume’s actual argument is philosophically rich and far more robust than is generally thought. This response argues that George is unsuccessful, ignoring crucial passages and misinterpreting others.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11153-016-9590-1
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 64,178
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

Reported Miracles: A Critique of Hume.J. Houston - 1994 - Cambridge University Press.

View all 16 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Everlasting Check: Hume on Miracles. [REVIEW]Kenneth L. Pearce - 2016 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 54 (4):680-681.
A New Interpretation of Hume's 'Of Miracles'.Chris Slupik - 1995 - Religious Studies 31 (4):517 - 536.
Hume and Miracles.Matthew C. Bagger - 1997 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 35 (2):237 - 251.
Against Miracles.John Collier - 1986 - Dialogue 25 (2):349-.
Questions of Miracle.Robert A. Larmer - 1996 - Carleton University Press.
Hume on Miracles: The Issue of Question--Begging.Yann Schmitt - 2012 - Forum Philosophicum: International Journal for Philosophy 17 (1):49-71.


Added to PP index

Total views
28 ( #393,169 of 2,454,920 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #225,801 of 2,454,920 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes