More handpicked essays just for you.
Hume's argument against religion
David hume’s criticisms of the arguments for god’s existence
Hume on miracles summary
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In this chapter Taylor goes on to say what she thinks a miracle. “It reminded me of that Bible story where somebody or other struck a rock and the water poured out. Only this was better, flowers out of bare dirt. The Miracle of Dog Doo Park” (152).Taylor starts to recall of what she thought was a miracle. How a rock was able to pour out water.
In Dialogues concerning Natural religion Hume explores whether or not faith is rational. as a result of Hume is AN philosopher (i.e. somebody WHO thinks that every one information comes through experience), he thinks that a belief is rational given that it's sufficiently supported by experiential proof. therefore the question is absolutely, is there enough proof within the world to permit North American country to infer AN infinitely sensible, wise, powerful, excellent God? Hume doesn't raise whether or not we are able to rationally prove that God exists, however rather whether or not we are able to rationally return to any conclusions regarding God's nature. He asserts that the primary question is on the far side doubt; the latter is ab initio undecided.
I find this to be the strongest example of the sway these miracles held, even non-believers respected and were drawn to them. I personally can easily put myself in the shoes of one of the curious non-believers of the time, since for me nothing pulls quite like the mysterious. Wriggins also touches on the power of miracles in her depiction of the Buddhist pilgrim Xuanzang. Xuanzang set out to gather facts on The Buddha’s life, however a large focus of his was on the miracles The Buddha performed(Wriggins 95). The miracles in these stories were not just agents to recruit new followers to Buddhism, they also held a lot of emotional significance to the practitioners of the time.
The question that is asked time and time again is whether or not god exists. It is evident that people hold different beliefs. It is evident that through some of the beliefs of J.L. Mackie that it could be argued that God does not actually exist. I find this argument to be more agreeable. In Mackie’s Evil and Omnipotence, he argues many points to support why it should be believed that god does not exist.
Kierkegaard believes that the existence of God could not be proven by reasons. However, he did not think that it was rational to believe in God, but to have faith in God. In Kierkegaard reading I disagree in his perspective because I believe that a person should have faith to believe in God and his existence. I also disagree in how he believes in faith of God, but not in God itself.
Hume’s posited system of belief contained within A Treatise of Human Nature maintains a uniquely contemporary outlook in the discipline of philosophy as well as contemporary psychology. Within the Treatise, special consideration is given with regard to how one forms a belief and how one revises a belief. Given the continued important role of beliefs in relation to resultant actions as well as the ramifications of personal beliefs within a community, it becomes necessary to examine how one comes to belief and how one corrects or revises a belief. It is the intention of the following work to examine Hume’s account of belief as well as belief revision (correction?) and further assess the possible contributions to contemporary psychological research
These two characters explained that there can be miracles in the world, but the imagination most likely won’t
Introduction Miracles are often defined as an event that is unbelievable and unexpected, it can be a series of events and it is usually believed to be caused by godly powers or by unexplainable powers because it doesn’t follow the rules of nature. A miracle usually delivers a message in religion but it can also be a natural miracle, as in it would snow in a place that is believed to have never been cold or experienced snow. Or it can also be a health miracle, for example: a woman that had no hope in conceiving gets pregnant without any medication. But in general, Miracles usually cover religion and deliver an important message to the people, either to test their belief in religion or to warn and teach them specific things in the religion.
If God exists, he can act if he wants to, and all alleged miracles can be sifted through a historical mesh. Furthermore, legal defeaters can come in handy in miracle-claim analysis. In our legal system, when witnesses provide conflicting testimony, lawyers do not simply throw up their hands and go home. They try to overpower the opponents’ testimony—known as a rebutting defeater—or to sabotage and raise doubts on the rival’s evidence—known as undercutting defeater. Both of these defeaters are relevant in miracle assessment and can be used actively in historical research.
Thanks Romanii, this has been an entertaining debate. Final rebuttal: Con interprets the part my argument that “Under God” was added in response to communism to presume originalism. Rather, I was only providing historical context. Demonstrating that the justification used for adding the phrase is no longer a current concern. This was purely to provide context.
So, maybe even miracles can be explained away through the probabilities of quantum physics. It may be agreed, however, that if a person walked through a wall multiple times that this person may have some supernatural ability or connection with a higher
Hume states that in the process of human reasoning, there is a crucial step in which experience ties different thoughts and ideas together. Hume uses an example of someone being dropped on earth without any prior experience to anything. He says that this individual will have no sense of anything in life. He says that this individuals life will basically be hundreds of random events without any connection. Hume’s answer to this question is that human’s reasoning regarding experience comes from customs and not from the actual understanding.
Hume distinguished the general arguments saying that all miracles claim to be a subject to certain failure. According to Hume, miracle itself is a violation of the laws of nature and our knowledge of miracles is more likely based on the testimony of others. However, the secondhand testimony is considered less reliable than if it was experienced by ourselves. In his section “Of Miracles”, Hume argues that we have no convincing reason to believe in miracles, and definitely not to see them as the basis for the religion.
The purpose is not to prove that miracles no longer occur. This is to put everything into the right perspective. “We must remember that God can do anything He wants, with anyone He wants, anytime He wants. There are plenty of modern day stories of miraculous events in which God obviously got directly involved in a situation. We need to be careful not to become pharisaical and say this is what God cannot do, what God can do, or what God must do, etc.”
However, the skepticism that was brought upon me was highly complex. If I denied that miracles occur, I would also be doubting my own religion and going against the words of God. If I was to believe in my own faith and that miracles exist, however, the question would still remain regarding why another miracle wasn’t presented to my uncle, making me hesitant to value any scientific research. Referring again to Raymo Chet in the piece “Miracles and Explanations”, he claims, “As I searched among the miracles of my faith, I found none that was not contaminated with the likelihood of flawed testimony, fraud, or wishful thinking. Always there was the possibility of a natural explanation”.
