a 4-pages paper in philosophy!!!!

Intro to Philosophy

Hume “Of Miracles”

Hume

•  David Hume (1711-1776) •  ScoCsh Enlightenment •  Enlightenment 17-18th centuries (the age of reason, not tradiHon)

•  He was a skepHc and is noted for his arguments against the cosmological and teleological arguments for the existence of God.

•  cosmological and teleological arguments

•  cosmos = universe (order) •  telos = end (“beginning” in the sense of design)

Miracles

•  According to Hume, no maQer how strong the evidence for a specific miracle may be, it will always be more raHonal to reject the miracle than to believe in it.

“A miracle is a viola.on of the laws of nature; and as a firm and unalterable experience has established these laws, the proof against a miracle, from the very nature of the fact, is as en.re as any argument from experience as can be imagined …”

“It is no miracle that a man, seemingly in good health, should die on a sudden: because such a kind of death, though more unusual than any other, has yet been frequently observed to happen. But it is a miracle that a dead man should come to life; because that has never been observed, in any age or country.”

“There must, therefore, be a uniform experience against every miraculous event, otherwise the event would not merit that appella.on.”

Hume’s BoQom Line

1.  The laws of nature describe regulariHes. 2.  Miracles are singulariHes, excepHons to the regular

course of nature and so are exceedingly rare. 3.  Evidence for what is regular and repeatable must

always be more than evidence for what is singular and unrepeatable.

4.  The wise man bases his belief on the weight of evidence.

5.  Therefore no wise man can ever believe in a miracle.

Miracles

•  Hume noted that there are two factors to assess in deciding whether to believe any given piece of tesHmony: the reliability of the witness and the probability of that to which they tesHfy.

Miracles

•  The tesHmony of a witness that is both honest and a good judge of that to which they tesHfy is worth much. The tesHmony of a witness who is either dishonest or not in a posiHon to know that to which they tesHfy is worth liQle.

Miracles

The reliability of the witness is therefore something that is to be taken into account in deciding whether to believe anything on the basis of tesHmony.

Miracles

•  The probability of that to which they tesHfy, however, is also relevant

Miracles

•  If a witness tesHfies to sighHng a flying pig then it is more likely that their tesHmony is false than that their tesHmony is true, even if they are a reliable witness.

Miracles

•  The reliability required of a witness in order for his tesHmony to jusHfy belief in that to which he tesHfies increases as the probability of that to which he tesHfies decreases.

Miracles

•  According to Hume, however, a miracle is by definiHon an event that is as unlikely as anything else. Miracles, for Hume, necessarily involve violaHons of laws of nature. Laws of nature, though, are as well-established as it is possible for anything to be.

Miracles

•  It will always, therefore, be more likely that the tesHmony of a witness to a miracle is false than that it is true. It will always be more raHonal to disbelieve a claim that a miracle has occurred than to accept it.

Miracles

•  What holds for the second-hand tesHmony of others also holds for first-hand evidence from our own senses. Whatever evidence our senses may give us that a miracle has occurred, it will always be more likely that our senses are in error than that a miracles really has occurred.

Miracles

•  Note that this is not an argument against the possibility of miracles; Hume’s conclusion is not that miracles do not happen.

Miracles

•  His conclusion is that no evidence is sufficient to establish that a miracle has occurred, that even if a miracle has occurred we ought not to believe in it.

CriHcism?

•  One ground on which to criHcize it, though, is in its concepHon of a miracle. Miracles, it has been argued, need not be violaHons of laws of nature. An answered prayer, for example, may properly be described as a miracle, but it does not necessarily violate any natural law.

Miracles

•  Miracles are simply events that point us towards God. This broader understanding of a miracle raises the possibility that there are at least some miracles that are not so improbable as Hume supposes, and so which can aQract raHonal belief.

Hume’s Argument

•  In chapter 90 Hume states, "A miracle is a violaHon of the laws of nature; and as a firm and unalterable experience has established these laws, the proof against a miracle, from the very nature of the fact, is as enHre as any argument from experience can possibly be imagined." From this Hume seems to be implying:

1) A miracle is a violaHon of the laws of nature. 2) The laws of nature are derived from our uniform experience and are a descripHon of what always happens. 3) Thus by definiHon miracles never happen.

Problem?

•  It simply illustrates that the term "miracle" can be defined in such a manner as to be logically incoherent, such as a "married bachelor".

Modified version of Hume’s argument

1) A miracle is a violaHon of the laws of nature. 2) The laws of nature are a descripHon of what usually happens. 3) Thus a miracle is an unusual event.