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

Learn More →

Hume, Miracles and Lotteries

Hume, Miracles and Lotteries HUME, MIRACLES D LOTTERIES This paper addresses recent criticisms Hume's Sorensen account s skepticism with regard miracles, by d Hambourger who argue re are counterexamples, illustrated by lotteries, Hume's how truth reports improbable (eir first or second hd) must be evaluated. y believe se counterexamples are sufficient prove Hume's argument agast believability miracles, defed as violations laws nature caused by God, is unsound. ir arguments merit consideration only ir own right but also on basis hisrical precedent, sce y have common assumption is found Butler's criticism Hume's predecessors this debate. who 'Butler' bulk my paper deals with Hambourger, most detailed Sorensen's presents version version c be criticism. swered light evaluation Hambourger 's argument. Hume's Argument Hume's argument is agast possibility miracles but agast possibility it could ever be reasonable believe a miracle had occurred. His argument c be summed up as follows: judgg credibility a report improbable , could be mistaken. determed by known laws nature. probability must probability is degree which it conms Laws nature are mulated be weighed agast probability report on basis unim experience. Assumg a miracle is a violation laws nature, y judgment is miraculous presupposes a judgment re exists a unim pattern causation http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Hume Studies Hume Society

Hume, Miracles and Lotteries

Hume Studies , Volume 14 (2) – Jan 26, 1988

Loading next page...
 
/lp/hume-society/hume-miracles-and-lotteries-J8HQH6XEjS
Publisher
Hume Society
Copyright
Copyright © Hume Society
ISSN
1947-9921
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

HUME, MIRACLES D LOTTERIES This paper addresses recent criticisms Hume's Sorensen account s skepticism with regard miracles, by d Hambourger who argue re are counterexamples, illustrated by lotteries, Hume's how truth reports improbable (eir first or second hd) must be evaluated. y believe se counterexamples are sufficient prove Hume's argument agast believability miracles, defed as violations laws nature caused by God, is unsound. ir arguments merit consideration only ir own right but also on basis hisrical precedent, sce y have common assumption is found Butler's criticism Hume's predecessors this debate. who 'Butler' bulk my paper deals with Hambourger, most detailed Sorensen's presents version version c be criticism. swered light evaluation Hambourger 's argument. Hume's Argument Hume's argument is agast possibility miracles but agast possibility it could ever be reasonable believe a miracle had occurred. His argument c be summed up as follows: judgg credibility a report improbable , could be mistaken. determed by known laws nature. probability must probability is degree which it conms Laws nature are mulated be weighed agast probability report on basis unim experience. Assumg a miracle is a violation laws nature, y judgment is miraculous presupposes a judgment re exists a unim pattern causation

Journal

Hume StudiesHume Society

Published: Jan 26, 1988

There are no references for this article.