Interpreting Hume on miracles

Religious Studies 45 (3):325-338 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Contemporary commentators on Hume’s essay, "Of Miracles" have increasingly tended to argue that Hume never intended to suggest that testimonial evidence must always be insufficient to justify belief in a miracle. This is in marked contrast to earlier commentators who interpreted Hume as intending to demonstrate that testimonial evidence is incapable in principle of ever establishing rational belief in a miracle. In this article I argue that this traditional interpretation is the correct one

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,271

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Mackie's treatment of miracles.Richard Otte - 1996 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 39 (3):151-158.
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 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Miracles and Science: Mora than a Miraculous Relationship.Yiftach J. H. Fehige - 2012 - Toronto Journal of Theology 28 (1):159-163.
C. S. Lewis’s Critique of Hume’s “on Miracles”.Robert Larmer - 2008 - Faith and Philosophy 25 (2):154-171.
Hume, holism, and miracles.J. Gill - 2001 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 79 (3):439 – 440.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-07-28

Downloads
148 (#122,901)

6 months
22 (#116,475)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Robert A. Larmer
University of New Brunswick

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references