Hume and Religious Miracles

Philosophia Christi 13 (1):165-168 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX


Robert Larmer critiques my view that the correct interpretation of David Hume’s argument against miracles in “Of Miracles” is that no testimony of a miracle can serve as the foundation of a religion. Larmer thinks that there is no unified argument in the section but says that Hume’s essential argument is that there can never be a justification for believing that a miracle has occurred on the basis of testimony. I raise a number of problems with Larmer’s interpretation, not the least of which is the fact that Hume explicitly contradicts such a reading.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Against Miracles.John Collier - 1986 - Dialogue 25 (2):349-.
A reply to Robert Larmer.Kirk Mcdermid - 2008 - Religious Studies 44 (2):161-164.
Interpreting Hume on miracles: ROBERT A. LARMER.Robert A. Larmer - 2009 - Religious Studies 45 (3):325-338.
Miracles, Evidence, and God.Robert Larmer - 2003 - Dialogue 42 (1):107-.
Interpreting Hume on miracles.Robert A. Larmer - 2009 - Religious Studies 45 (3):325-338.
Miracles and Science: Mora than a Miraculous Relationship.Yiftach J. H. Fehige - 2012 - Toronto Journal of Theology 28 (1):159-163.
Against 'against miracles'.Robert Larmer - 1988 - Sophia 27 (1):20 - 25.
C. S. Lewis’s Critique of Hume’s “on Miracles”.Robert Larmer - 2008 - Faith and Philosophy 25 (2):154-171.
Hume and miracles.Matthew C. Bagger - 1997 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 35 (2):237 - 251.


Added to PP

10 (#1,160,791)

6 months
3 (#1,023,809)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Gregory Bock
University of Texas At Tyler

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references