Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Hume's Abject Failure: The Argument against Miracles (review)

Hume's Abject Failure: The Argument against Miracles (review) Hume's Abject Failure: The Argument against Miracles (review) Michael P. Levine Hume Studies, Volume 28, Number 1, April 2002, pp. 161-167 (Review) Published by Hume Society DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/hms.2011.0212 For additional information about this article https://muse.jhu.edu/article/383270/summary Access provided at 17 Feb 2020 18:18 GMT from JHU Libraries Hume Studies Volume 28, Number 1, April 2002, pp. 161-167 JOHN EARMAN. Hume's Abject Failure: The Argument against Miracles. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. Pp. xi + 217. ISBN 0-19-512737-4, cloth, $47.50; ISBN 0-19-512738-2, paper, $22.95. This book is divided into two parts. The first (73 pages plus notes and a two-page appendix on probability) is Earman's harsh critique of Hume's es- say and its conclusions. The second part of the book (95-212) contains selections from primary texts of Locke, Spinoza, Clarke, and others, along with the text "Of Miracles," recording changes that Hume made. There is little in the way of explanation, a single paragraph in the preface, as to why these texts have been selected. Presumably, Earman sees each of these as con- taining something significant to contribute to the formulation of his theses in the first part of the book—especially his claim that Hume's arguments are largely http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Hume Studies Hume Society

Hume's Abject Failure: The Argument against Miracles (review)

Hume Studies , Volume 28 (1) – Jan 26, 2011

Loading next page...
 
/lp/hume-society/hume-apos-s-abject-failure-the-argument-against-miracles-review-XKvxGIJSv4

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Hume Society
ISSN
1947-9921

Abstract

Hume's Abject Failure: The Argument against Miracles (review) Michael P. Levine Hume Studies, Volume 28, Number 1, April 2002, pp. 161-167 (Review) Published by Hume Society DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/hms.2011.0212 For additional information about this article https://muse.jhu.edu/article/383270/summary Access provided at 17 Feb 2020 18:18 GMT from JHU Libraries Hume Studies Volume 28, Number 1, April 2002, pp. 161-167 JOHN EARMAN. Hume's Abject Failure: The Argument against Miracles. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. Pp. xi + 217. ISBN 0-19-512737-4, cloth, $47.50; ISBN 0-19-512738-2, paper, $22.95. This book is divided into two parts. The first (73 pages plus notes and a two-page appendix on probability) is Earman's harsh critique of Hume's es- say and its conclusions. The second part of the book (95-212) contains selections from primary texts of Locke, Spinoza, Clarke, and others, along with the text "Of Miracles," recording changes that Hume made. There is little in the way of explanation, a single paragraph in the preface, as to why these texts have been selected. Presumably, Earman sees each of these as con- taining something significant to contribute to the formulation of his theses in the first part of the book—especially his claim that Hume's arguments are largely

Journal

Hume StudiesHume Society

Published: Jan 26, 2011

There are no references for this article.