Hume's claim against miracles is that it does not matter how strong the evidence for a miracle it may be it is rather more rational to reject the miracle than to believe in it. Hume states that there are two ways in order to decide to believe a piece of evidence. The reliability of a witness is the first factor. A witness can be dishonest or be ignorant about a situation which would make their claims worth little. So Humes says to take in consideration how reliable the witness is. The second factor is the probability of what a witness testifies. For example, Sandeep can claim to have seen a miracle. However, it is more than likely that his testimony is false. This also includes our own senses. For example, if I see a miracle it is more than
Abby McVay Richard Swinburne Miracles and Historical Evidence Summary: "We have four kinds of evidence about what happened at some past instant-our own apparent memories of our past experiences, the testimony of others about their past experiences, physical traces, and our contemporary understanding of what things are physically impossible," Richard Swinburne mentioned in the second paragraph (page 455). Swinburne ponders what evidence would be needed to support miracles and then challenges arguments put forward by philosophers, like Hume, and the laws of nature. Swinburne's evidence for supporting miracles consists of four main arguments mentioned in the quote. Once the guidelines to support evidence are identified, Swinburne argues that
Miracles in the Production and Destruction of Faith In basic religion classes, students are told that as Catholics, they need to have a faith in God and that their faith may not seem reasonable at times. As the students get older, they are told that in order to strengthen their faith, doubts, and working through these doubts, are an expected part of their lives while miracles may strengthen their growing beliefs. To further complicate the matter, students are taught that too many doubts can bring about a loss of faith, as can doubts from these same miracles. In John Irving’s A Prayer for Owen Meany, Irving discusses this balance between healthy doubts bringing about faith and too many doubts eroding faith.
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.
To argue this the definition of miracle must be brought up, a miracle is an unusual or wonderful event that is believed to be caused by the power of God. With this
Witness confidence and certainty are a part of the system variable category because it can be
Hume, therefore, came up with the idea "mitigated skepticism. " This method tries to limit philosophical inquiries to the abilities of human intelligence while also exercising caution in reasoning. Even so, the application of “mitigated skepticism” in everyday life is a hard task. Calculating each of our decisions with a system of logical steps is very time consuming. Life is short and people don’t have enough time and motivation to find the most logical result.
The clergy’s actions during the first scaffold scene demonstrate the hypocrisy of Hume’s idea of suspension of justice regarding the sinner. Upon being coerced into extorting Hester’s repentance, the young minister beseeches her to “name thy fellow-sinner and fellow-sufferer... What can thy silence do for him, except it tempt him--yea, compel him, as it were--to add hypocrisy to sin?” (Hawthorne, Ch. 3). Although equally guilty, Dimmesdale’s position within the theocracy enables him to transfer the responsibility of confessing to his lover.
Miracles are extremely difficult to prove as science cannot explain miracles. Another problem is that theists want miracles to happen, so they may lie about events that could be classed as miracles, some miracles are fake and made up by individuals that want fame and money for the event that they are said to have experienced. If the miracle is the curing of a disease, it may be that the doctors wrongly diagnosed an illness and the person was cured naturally. It is difficult to prove whether a revelation actually happened or not, especially special revelations. Special revelations occur to specific individuals or groups so they are therefore difficult to prove, scientific testing cannot prove whether a revelation actually occurred or not.
While investigating the trials he informs the citizens that he will not make assumptions based on religion and he will look to all causes to find the most accurate reason for the anomalies. “We cannot look to superstition in this. ... I must tell you all that I shall not proceed unless you are prepared to believe me if I should find no bruise of hell upon her.” (38) By Hale saying this he shows that his top priority is to find the truth.
Hume’s response to this is through is character Philo, Philo said that we should not judge the attributes of god on something like Paley proposes. Philo argues that we cannot judge the entirety of the universe on one single part of nature because nature has an infinite number of springs of principle. Also that we cannot base God on our
Ironically, in arguing that he has been deceived by his senses, Descartes also argues that we can see through these deceptions. I do not claim that we are never deceived, just that we can overcome such deceptions. Therefore we can trust our senses as long as we are aware and cautious. Thus, Descartes’ argument does not validate the degree of skepticism
Since miracles are supposedly an occur that is supernatural, or beyond the powers of nature, it cannot be associated to its laws. Furthermore, fundamentals of miracles transcends into the laws of nature. For example, if many more people witnessed miracle, it would outweigh the laws of nature because the miracles would become a law of nature—testimony of all past experiences. This is counter evidence for Hume’s claim that more miracles would merit as evidence for the existence of the phenomena; it would no longer be an illusions or trick, it would be real and no longer a
Also, that all theories shouldn’t be based on reasoning or instinct, but on experience. Our impressions vs. our ideas. In another popular book by Hume called, “Equiry Concerning Human Understanding” he addresses his thoughts on skepticism, “the idea that we cannot know anything about the world with certainty.” Hume believed that we cannot guarantee anything, because we do not obtain the ability to reason with ourselves. For example, just because we’ve loved a certain food for years there is no guarantee that you’ld like it tomorrow.
Hume on the other hand can only confirm what has already happened, being that is the most truthful and logical
Question Number 2: What are the strengths and weakness of using mystical experience to prove one’s belief in God? Answer: A person who has mystical experience claims himself to be in direct communication with God or other supernatural beings. The belief that one has about mystical experience is that the experience does not need to the arguments or reasoning to be believed.