Hume’s case against Miracles

1. Hume’s case against Miracles LO: I will know about Hume’s argument against Miracles, and give some evaluation for his conclusions

2. The influence of the mind Mind over matter: • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJ7hxF9BlBM Hand cuffs. • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUukmnqgv8o Fishing at Victoria Falls • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99ZvV8AEOb8&NR=1&feature=fvwp Face off with lions

3. Task – Active reading • Use Taylor handout to find the following: • Outline and explain Hume’s first and second argument against miracles.

4. David Hume – Argument 1: Lack of probability David Hume argues that the probability of miracles actually happening is so low that it is irrational and illogical to believe that miracles do occur • Hume is an empiricist, meaning that he emphasises experience and observations of the world as the way of learning new things. He argues four points: • Laws of nature appear to be fixed and unvarying. For example, the law of gravity is the same throughout the universe so far as we know. • Sometimes, there are reports of miracles happening which violate these laws of nature • Which is more likely? That the law of nature is wrong or that the reports about the miracle event were inaccurate? • Conclusion: it is more likely that the report of a miracle happening is incorrect than that the laws of nature have been violated.

5. David Hume – Argument 1: Lack of probability • Definition – ‘a violation of the laws of nature’ • Key Quote– “No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavours to establish” David Hume, ‘An enquiry concerning human understanding’, 1748

6. David Hume – Argument 2: Practical Arguments • The ‘barbarian’ argument. Miracles only seem to happen among ignorant, uneducated and barbarous people • Reports of miracles reflect natural human tendency for gossip, exaggeration and sensationalism • If a religion claims that a particular miracle proves their religion to be true then this claim is devalued by similar claims from other religions. The probability weakens with each further contradictory claim, therefore it’s more reasonable to believe that none of them are true/establish the truth of a particular religion.

7. Thought point – Are you truthful? • Discuss ‘thought point’ pg 330 of Taylor

8. Task • In pairs, come up with some evaluative points to support and criticise Hume’s conclusions

9. Hume: Critical Analysis Practical Arguments • Problems with the Barbarian argument – is this fair? Does this just reflect someone who hasn’t experienced a miracle? • There is no such thing as an unbiased perspective – maybe an atheist(?) like Hume wants to fail to see the miraculous • Although contradictory claims from other religions may devalue a particular religions report of a miracle, this only shows that it is not the most rational position to believe in miracles, not that miracles are impossible.

10. Hume’s inductive problem Arguing inductively • Living organisms are observed to need oxygen to survive. • No living organism has been observed that does not need Oxygen to survive CONCLUSION: Living organisms cannot survive without Oxygen • No empirical evidence of Unicorn’s existence has been found • There are approximately 7 billion people living in the world today • It is likely that if there was evidence of unicorns existing at least one of the 7 billion people in the world would have observed it. • No one has produced empirical evidence of unicorns. CONCLUSION: It is most improbable that unicorns exist QUESTION: What possible new evidence would undermine each of these arguments?

11. Hume’s inductive problem • Hume argues inductively from observations that the laws of nature are such that they cannot be violated. • Hume’s inductive argument can be challenged by new empirical evidence. The question thus becomes: which interpretation of an account of a miracle best matches the empirical evidence gained from observation and experience? It is important to note that the fact that something is more probable is not, on its own proof that something is correct. In detective stories, detectives often solve a case by showing that empirical evidence proves that what is improbable is actually true. In the same way the fact that the probability of a miracle occurring is very low is not enough on its own to prove that it is irrational to believe that miracles do occur.

12. Counter argument – Hume would accept this and points out the problem of induction explicitly. Although we can’t prove it philosophically accepting past evidence is something we rely on in everyday life – maybe this is what the term rational means!

13. Nature of faith • It is part of human nature to sometimes accept the improbable (this is what faith is all about). • 'But why do the very ransomed children of God themselves know so little of that habitual, conscious communion with God which Scripture offers? The answer is because of our chronic unbelief. Faith enables our spiritual sense to function. Where faith is defective the result will be inward insensibility and numbness toward spiritual things.' A W Tozer • 'Faith is an activity, it is something that has to be exercised. It does not come into operation itself, you and I have to put it into operation. It is a form of activity.' Martin Lloyd Jones • ‘And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him’ Hebrews 11:6 How might this relate to miracles?

14. Summary • David Hume’s arguments against miracles: • Lack of probability • Practical arguments – Uneducated and barbaric, Sensationalist, Contradictory • Eval: Unfair, biased, Inductive problem. Nature of faith. What makes most sense/is most rational?

15. Responses to Hume • Use the handout to prepare a presentation to the rest of the class on Swinburne’s response to Hume. Focus on the following: • What Swinburne says about • ‘generalisations’ • ‘corrigible’ • A definition • How Swinburne challenges what Hume has said • What Swinburne says regarding evidence for miracles

16. Swinburne’s argument • Laws of nature are the best generalisations that we have. However, these are subject to change – future experience/discoveries may change our generalisations (Does Hume recognise this – Swinburne thinks not). • Definition – the ‘occurrence of a non-repeatable counter instance to a law of nature’ (i.e goes against our current generalisations but is not enough for us to modify these generalisations) • Key Point – a one off event would not get us to change our generalisations. But neither should we necessarily doubt whether the event actually happened just because it goes against our generalisations.

17. Swinburne’s Responses to Practical Arguments • The range of different religious miracles do not necessarily cancel one another out. Most religious miracles do not purport to establish the truth of a particular religion e.g. healing miracles at Lourdes or in the River Ganges are just instances of God helping the needy. The fact that miracles are ‘claimed’ by particular religious groups is incidental. • Problems with the ‘barbarian argument’. How do we define an educated person? Problem of arrogance. Are people really educated today? Divide and conquer methodology - i.e. those reporting miracles automatically classed as ignorant.

18. “No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle…” - Swinburne questions this claim. We need to treat reports of miracles like reports of any past events – i.e. weigh up the evidence and conclude rather than being sceptical immediately. • Four types of historical evidence with varying degrees of reliability: 1. Memories of own experiences 2. Testimony of other people’s experiences 3. Physical consequences/traces of an event 4. Scientific information about what is impossible and what is simply improbable

19. Swinburne suggests that we reflect upon the reliability of evidence (i.e. we might not believe someone who often lies but may be more convinced by the empirical evidence of a friend). • Swinburne stresses the importance of getting as much evidence together as possible and accepting all of it, unless we have reason to do otherwise.

20. Summary • Swinburne’s suggestions are not claiming that miracles do happen, but Swinburne is quite clearly saying that it is possible that they happen, and unlike David Hume, you should not automatically be sceptical and reject a story about a miracle without considering the evidence. • The essence of the claim that Swinburne makes is that Hume is mistaken in rejecting all witnesses’ statements about miracles. We have to examine seriously what a person claims when they say they have witnessed or experienced a miracle but we should not reject it automatically.

21. Responses to Swinburne • Has Swinburne fully understood what Hume is actually saying about the laws of nature? Hume recognises that laws of nature are not fixed but are based on what past evidence we have – Hume points out the problem of induction. • Has he really undermined the “No testimony is sufficient” claim? Surely it is still more likely that a reliable friend was mistaken about their experience, or that there is another explanation for an apparent physical trace of a miracle.

22. Plenary • Come up with a question to ask someone else in the class. It must relate to what we have done on Hume and Swinburne.

23. Exam practise • ‘In practise, miracles can never be proven.’ Discuss • Create a mark scheme for this essay title – How would this be marked? What needs to be done? Discuss each criteria in turn. Under each criteria fill in what the appropriate points are. Referring to the actual mark scheme would be helpful here.