On the evidence of testimony for miracles: A bayesian interpretation of David Hume's analysis

Philosophical Quarterly 37 (147):166-186 (1987)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

A BAYESIAN ARTICULATION OF HUME’S VIEWS IS OFFERED BASED ON A FORM OF THE BAYES-LAPLACE THEOREM THAT IS SUPERFICIALLY LIKE A FORMULA OF CONDORCET’S. INFINITESIMAL PROBABILITIES ARE EMPLOYED FOR MIRACLES AGAINST WHICH THERE ARE ’PROOFS’ THAT ARE NOT OPPOSED BY ’PROOFS’. OBJECTIONS MADE BY RICHARD PRICE ARE DEALT WITH, AND RECENT EXPERIMENTS CONDUCTED BY AMOS TVERSKY AND DANIEL KAHNEMAN ARE CONSIDERED IN WHICH PERSONS TEND TO DISCOUNT PRIOR IMPROBABILITIES WHEN ASSESSING REPORTS OF WITNESSES

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

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

A New Interpretation of Hume's 'Of Miracles'.Chris Slupik - 1995 - Religious Studies 31 (4):517 - 536.
Hume's abject failure: the argument against miracles.John Earman - 2000 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Hume on testimony revisited.Axel Gelfert - 2010 - History of Philosophy & Logical Analysis 13:60-75.
Religious Experience.Travis Dumsday - 2008 - International Philosophical Quarterly 48 (3):371-379.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
191 (#100,628)

6 months
40 (#92,915)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Epistemological problems of testimony.Jonathan E. Adler - 2006 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Hume on probability.Barry Gower - 1991 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 42 (1):1-19.

View all 16 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references