Philosophy and Theology 10 (1):101-106 (1997)

Authors
Michael P. Levine
University of Western Australia
Abstract
Bayesian analyses are prominent among recent and allegedly novel interpretations of Hume’s argument against the justified belief in miracles. However, since there is no consensus on just what Hume’s argument is any Bayesian analysis will beg crucial issues of interpretation. Apart from independent philosophical arguments—arguments that would undermine the relevance of a Bayesian analysis to the question of the credibility of reports of the miraculous—no such analysis can, in principle, prove that no testimony can establish the credibility of a miracle. Bayesian analyses of Hume’s argument are not analyses of Hume’s argument at all—but superfluous representations of it.
Keywords Hume  miracles  testimony
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 0890-2461
DOI philtheol199710112
Options
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: 60,021
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.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Bayes, Hume, and Miracles.John Earman - 1993 - Faith and Philosophy 10 (3):293-310.
Bayes, Hume, Price, and Miracles.John Earman - 2002 - In Richard Swinburne (ed.), Bayes’s Theorem. Oxford University Press. pp. 91--110.
A New Interpretation of Hume's 'Of Miracles'.Chris Slupik - 1995 - Religious Studies 31 (4):517 - 536.
David Hume's No-Miracles Argument Begets a Valid No-Miracles Argument.Colin Howson - 2015 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 54:41-45.
The Credibility of Miracles.Ruth Weintraub - 1996 - Philosophical Studies 82 (3):359 - 375.
Belief in Miracles: Tillotson's Argument Against Transubstantiation as a Model for Hume. [REVIEW]Michael Levine - 1988 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 23 (3):125 - 160.
A Bayesian Proof of a Humean Principle.Donald Gillies - 1991 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 42 (2):255-256.
Prophecy, Early Modern Apologetics, and Hume's Argument Against Miracles.Peter Harrison - 1999 - Journal of the History of Ideas 60 (2):241 - 256.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2011-01-09

Total views
105 ( #98,671 of 2,433,540 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #217,362 of 2,433,540 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes