Hume's Misconception on Miracles
Moderator:Metacrock
- Cheeky Monkey
- Posts:61
- Joined:Tue Jul 28, 2009 6:38 am
I agree that Hume's definition of miracles leaves a lot to be desired. I'm hard pressed to come up with a definition that isn't tautological though. I think "miracle" is a subjective layer of meaning we ascribe to an event a la Pulp Fiction. I do however think that Hume's basic idea is a good heuristic for testimony concerning extraordinary events but I'd recast it as a Bayesian Inference.
"They'll be sorry. They'll be sorry if I die - except that I can't. Whatever you do it ends up raining. What's it all for? What's the point of it all? And if it hasn't got a point, what's the point of that? (Monkey, Great Sage Equal of Heaven)
Re: Hume's Misconception on Miracles
I agree that it's subjective.I think the term connotes a religious dimension to an unexplainable event. If you don't have that dimension then it's just a wired thing, like the lost Dutchman mine or Bigfoot or UFOs. It Bigfoot says "Jesus saves" then it becomes a miracle.Cheeky Monkey wrote:I agree that Hume's definition of miracles leaves a lot to be desired. I'm hard pressed to come up with a definition that isn't tautological though. I think "miracle" is a subjective layer of meaning we ascribe to an event a la Pulp Fiction. I do however think that Hume's basic idea is a good heuristic for testimony concerning extraordinary events but I'd recast it as a Bayesian Inference.
Still, things happen that violate our norms for what is supposed to happen and they suggest some kind of divine activity involved, and unbelievers are in denial about it.
That will always be an epistemological gap in any understanding of reality.
Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief