By Robert J. Fogelin
Due to the fact its booklet within the mid-eighteenth century, Hume's dialogue of miracles has been the objective of critical and sometimes ill-tempered assaults. during this e-book, certainly one of our prime historians of philosophy deals a scientific reaction to those attacks.
Arguing that those criticisms have--from the very start--rested on misreadings, Robert Fogelin starts by means of delivering a story of ways Hume's argument really unfolds. What Hume's critics (and even a few of his defenders) have didn't see is that Hume's fundamental argument relies on solving the best criteria of comparing testimony awarded on behalf of a miracle. Given the definition of a miracle, Hume really quite argues that the criteria for comparing such testimony has to be tremendous excessive. Hume then argues that, in actual fact, no testimony on behalf of a spiritual miracle has even come just about assembly the ideal criteria for recognition. Fogelin illustrates that Hume's critics have constantly misunderstood the constitution of this argument--and have saddled Hume with completely lousy arguments now not present in the textual content. He responds first to a couple early critics of Hume's argument after which to 2 fresh critics, David Johnson and John Earman. Fogelin's objective, despite the fact that, isn't really to "bash the bashers," yet particularly to teach that Hume's therapy of miracles has a coherence, intensity, and gear that makes it nonetheless the simplest paintings at the topic.
Read Online or Download A Defense of Hume on Miracles (Princeton Monographs in Philosophy) PDF
Similar theology books
An test has been made, writes the writer in his preface, to teach that the advance of Greek proposal and the unusual personality of Judaism inevitably rendered Christ s paintings assorted from that of Socrates. whereas dogmatic theology certainly comprises very many components derived from Greek philosophy, Christianity at its resource is in no clever Greek.
This specified multidisciplinary research perspectives Jesus as probably the most critical figures in heritage with a wide-ranging impression on faith, society, literature, paintings, and philosophy. As a old determine, there aren't any absolutes approximately Jesus. every one non secular culture, from Catholic to Quaker to Pentecostal to Buddhist, perceives him in a different way.
This better half presents a definitive choice of essays on postmodern theology, drawing at the paintings of these people who have made a particular contribution to the sector, and whose paintings could be major for the theologies written within the new millennium. The definitive selection of essays on postmodern theology, drawing at the paintings of these people who have made a particular contribution to the sphere.
- Karl Barth on Theology and Philosophy
- Proportionalism: The American Debate and Its European Roots
- Why I am not a Christian: and Other Essays on Religion and Related Subjects (Routledge Classics)
- The Philosophy of Language (Oxford Readings in Philosophy)
Additional resources for A Defense of Hume on Miracles (Princeton Monographs in Philosophy)
For the sake of us all, I hope so. ,” in “Behind” the Text: History and Biblical Interpretation, ed. Craig G. Bartholomew et al. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003), 101. An earlier version of this essay appeared as “Critical Studies of the New Testament and the User of the New Testament,” in Hermes and Athena: Biblical Exegesis and Philosophical Theology, ed. Flint (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame, 1993), 159–90. ,” 101, 105. , 101, 104. , 103. 2). 6 Sometimes the category of “incorrigible” is included here as well.
The grounds for our beliefs are internal to us, and we can get at them (if we know how and where to look). Stouter versions of internalism will insist upon quicker and more immediate access, and correspondingly will maintain that we exercise a sizable degree of control over our beliefs; weaker or more modest versions will insist only that we be able to gain the prerequisite access. But what they have in common is this conviction: for our beliefs to be truly justified, we must have access to—and corresponding responsibility for and control over—the grounds for those beliefs.
Corey is a coherentist. Corey has thought that there was a historical exodus, but he becomes aware of the “consensus” of CBS that there was not a historical exodus. He cannot square his belief in a historical exodus with the web of beliefs that include the conviction that CBS offers the best methods and that CBS will not allow belief in a historical exodus. Corey’s internalism demands that he have direct access to the grounds for his beliefs, and since he cannot access adequate grounds for belief in the historicity of the exodus, the conclusion becomes clear: intellectual honesty demands that he reject the view that there was a historical exodus.