In my philosophy class we have been discussing Hume and his skepticism of miracles. He says that miracles are possible, yet it is impossible for us to know that a miracle has occurred. He claim is not an ontological claim but an epistemological claim.
It really got me thinking....what do you think about miracles? What is your defintion of a miracle and are they possible and can we know if they occurred?
Miracles
-
trashtalkr
- Sports Guru
- Posts: 7978
- Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 8:20 pm
- Contact:
"If there were no eternal consciousness in a man, if at the bottom of everything there were only a wild ferment, a power that twisting in dark passions produced everything great or inconsequential; if an unfathomable insatiable emptiness lay hid beneath everything, what would life be but despair?"
Soren Kierkegaard
Soren Kierkegaard
| BBcode: | |
| Hide post links |
-
schmicko
- One for the road
- Posts: 520
- Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 4:59 pm
Whether or not you subscribe to Humes claims, one of the most notable
being...
"A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature; and as a firm and
unalterable experience has established these laws, the proof against a
miracle, from the very nature of the fact, is as entire as any argument
from experience can possibly be imagined. Why is it more than probable,
that all men must die; that lead cannot, of itself, remain suspended in the
air; that fire consumes wood, and is extinguished by water; unless it be,
that these events are found agreeable to the laws of nature, and there is
required a violation of these laws, or in other words, a miracle to prevent
them? Nothing is esteemed a miracle, if it ever happened in the common
course of nature. It is no miracle that a man, seemingly in good health,
should die on a sudden: because such a kind of death, though more
unusual than any other, has yet been frequently observed to happen. But
it is a miracle, that a dead man should come to life; because that has
never been observed in any age or country. There must, therefore, be a
uniform experience against every miraculous event, otherwise the event
would not merit that appellation"....
From David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding
L. A. Selby Bigge
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1902)
pp. 114-16.
....you have to consider semantics here. A "violition" of nature??....Many
people consider childbirth to be a miracle, or the simple existence of a
flower, or in my case, simply getting my bills paid on time, to be a
miracle.!!
I wonder if Humes musings were steeped slightly in religious belif. Simply by putting the question of a dead man coming to life, is ultmately a theological question. The only documented account we have of this is in the bible.
Personally, I think Humes perceptions are outdated.
being...
"A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature; and as a firm and
unalterable experience has established these laws, the proof against a
miracle, from the very nature of the fact, is as entire as any argument
from experience can possibly be imagined. Why is it more than probable,
that all men must die; that lead cannot, of itself, remain suspended in the
air; that fire consumes wood, and is extinguished by water; unless it be,
that these events are found agreeable to the laws of nature, and there is
required a violation of these laws, or in other words, a miracle to prevent
them? Nothing is esteemed a miracle, if it ever happened in the common
course of nature. It is no miracle that a man, seemingly in good health,
should die on a sudden: because such a kind of death, though more
unusual than any other, has yet been frequently observed to happen. But
it is a miracle, that a dead man should come to life; because that has
never been observed in any age or country. There must, therefore, be a
uniform experience against every miraculous event, otherwise the event
would not merit that appellation"....
From David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding
L. A. Selby Bigge
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1902)
pp. 114-16.
....you have to consider semantics here. A "violition" of nature??....Many
people consider childbirth to be a miracle, or the simple existence of a
flower, or in my case, simply getting my bills paid on time, to be a
miracle.!!
I wonder if Humes musings were steeped slightly in religious belif. Simply by putting the question of a dead man coming to life, is ultmately a theological question. The only documented account we have of this is in the bible.
Personally, I think Humes perceptions are outdated.
| BBcode: | |
| Hide post links |
-
trashtalkr
- Sports Guru
- Posts: 7978
- Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 8:20 pm
- Contact:
Well that was his definition of a miracle and I would have to disagree with that definition also. Hume was known as the philosopher that no one could accurately critique. I would definitely disagree with that assessment. I see a lot of things wrong with some of the things that Hume believes.
With that definition, Hume bases his entire argument though. He says that the only thing that is in favor of a miracle is testimony since miracles don't happen regularly by definition. He countered that the laws of nature were all testimonies contrary to the testimony of miracles.
Hume wasn't steeped in a religious belief. He didn't profess a religion at all and he actually said that the idea of God is a compound thought and that he doesn't really exist.
But....what do you think about miracles?
With that definition, Hume bases his entire argument though. He says that the only thing that is in favor of a miracle is testimony since miracles don't happen regularly by definition. He countered that the laws of nature were all testimonies contrary to the testimony of miracles.
Hume wasn't steeped in a religious belief. He didn't profess a religion at all and he actually said that the idea of God is a compound thought and that he doesn't really exist.
But....what do you think about miracles?
"If there were no eternal consciousness in a man, if at the bottom of everything there were only a wild ferment, a power that twisting in dark passions produced everything great or inconsequential; if an unfathomable insatiable emptiness lay hid beneath everything, what would life be but despair?"
Soren Kierkegaard
Soren Kierkegaard
| BBcode: | |
| Hide post links |
-
schmicko
- One for the road
- Posts: 520
- Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 4:59 pm
What do I think about miracles?...like I said...getting all my bills paid on time is a miracle!!...I'm not trying to be clever here....I really think the word 'miracle' is a hard one to examine objectively. It has a sense of magical , supernaturalism to it. I've never witnessed any kind of miracle in the way that, say, Disney (movies) would present it...but I've certainly had experiences that could only be described as miraculous..ie; being spared from death in a savage car accident.
Why, in a university philosophy class, are they asking you to examine something as nebulous as miracles?
Why, in a university philosophy class, are they asking you to examine something as nebulous as miracles?
| BBcode: | |
| Hide post links |
-
raum
- Posts: 3944
- Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 10:51 am
QUOTE(trashtalkr @ May 24 2007, 12:47 AM) Well that was his definition of a miracle and I would have to disagree with that definition also. Hume was known as the philosopher that no one could accurately critique. I would definitely disagree with that assessment. I see a lot of things wrong with some of the things that Hume believes.
The word "Miracles" (also translated as Wonders) is so far from what Hume says. A Palah, in Hebrew, is an act that is achieved or a means of gaining power in a way not understood, usually to a benevolent end. It is not something only Adonai can do, but he is said to be the author of all miracles, for who is so bold as to say what he does and does not do. It is also the name of the Angel of the Lord who gave Samson his strength.
I rather like my own definition, as if fits with "Palah", as well as the both greek words used "Dunamai" and "Semeion"
Miracle - an occurance of one of two conditions, either being :
a. an occurance, which because of timing or location transcends the base act itself, gving one the opportunity to experience a sense of liminal union with unseen benevolence guiding human action or experience.
b. an occurance by which one's profession of god's is expressed in a causal or acausal event that causes one to question or ponder what they may not yet know of the workings of Nature or Science.
As for Hume, I have little use for him. He seems to walk into the field with a bias against religion developed at a young age, and argues from that point deliberately. He stands as a man who questioned the unlearned notions of the Bible and tried to approach Empirical Science without its Theurgic Motive. Also, he drive point and point against Chrsitian tenets of faith, and never bothered to see if the linguistic forensics of the text of their doctrine hold up to scrutiny. He would curl in a ball at the grasping of the mechanics of a cd player, so little was his understanding of the perfect liquid we call light.
But he lived in a time where it was en vogue to profess all manner of miracle, and many were still making livings as workers of wonders and rappers of tables. Thus, it was in that benign hysteria that many overemphasized in their conviction that miracles happen. Must have been a damn annoying time to be a man attempting critical thought. As far as his notions of sequntial human existence, I flat outright deny they represent the BASIC existence of humanity, much less any exhalted state.
And "Anastasis" the word mistranslated in the New Testament does not mean resurrection.
Anestemi is a word meaning "of those who are being prepared at death to rise again (or be re-born) and go on a journey." Ana "in the midst of" and Astemi "preperation, or work done on a foundation to ensure a strong building or road."
QUOTEWith that definition, Hume bases his entire argument though. He says that the only thing that is in favor of a miracle is testimony since miracles don't happen regularly by definition. He countered that the laws of nature were all testimonies contrary to the testimony of miracles.
Hume wasn't steeped in a religious belief. He didn't profess a religion at all
Not so, he professed the Christian Creed and the Lords Prayer to the fishwives of Edinburgh, so they would rescue him. They were going to not life a finger to help him if he did not profess Christian faith, and to that end he lauded them as the most acute religious persons of their time! heheh
QUOTEand he actually said that the idea of God is a compound thought and that he doesn't really exist.
But....what do you think about miracles?
Because of the weight on that word, I use it or its illk infrequently. Suffice to say, in my life I have seen much that tells me humanity knows too little of Nature, Time, or Space to say what is "Natural".
The word "Miracles" (also translated as Wonders) is so far from what Hume says. A Palah, in Hebrew, is an act that is achieved or a means of gaining power in a way not understood, usually to a benevolent end. It is not something only Adonai can do, but he is said to be the author of all miracles, for who is so bold as to say what he does and does not do. It is also the name of the Angel of the Lord who gave Samson his strength.
I rather like my own definition, as if fits with "Palah", as well as the both greek words used "Dunamai" and "Semeion"
Miracle - an occurance of one of two conditions, either being :
a. an occurance, which because of timing or location transcends the base act itself, gving one the opportunity to experience a sense of liminal union with unseen benevolence guiding human action or experience.
b. an occurance by which one's profession of god's is expressed in a causal or acausal event that causes one to question or ponder what they may not yet know of the workings of Nature or Science.
As for Hume, I have little use for him. He seems to walk into the field with a bias against religion developed at a young age, and argues from that point deliberately. He stands as a man who questioned the unlearned notions of the Bible and tried to approach Empirical Science without its Theurgic Motive. Also, he drive point and point against Chrsitian tenets of faith, and never bothered to see if the linguistic forensics of the text of their doctrine hold up to scrutiny. He would curl in a ball at the grasping of the mechanics of a cd player, so little was his understanding of the perfect liquid we call light.
But he lived in a time where it was en vogue to profess all manner of miracle, and many were still making livings as workers of wonders and rappers of tables. Thus, it was in that benign hysteria that many overemphasized in their conviction that miracles happen. Must have been a damn annoying time to be a man attempting critical thought. As far as his notions of sequntial human existence, I flat outright deny they represent the BASIC existence of humanity, much less any exhalted state.
And "Anastasis" the word mistranslated in the New Testament does not mean resurrection.
Anestemi is a word meaning "of those who are being prepared at death to rise again (or be re-born) and go on a journey." Ana "in the midst of" and Astemi "preperation, or work done on a foundation to ensure a strong building or road."
QUOTEWith that definition, Hume bases his entire argument though. He says that the only thing that is in favor of a miracle is testimony since miracles don't happen regularly by definition. He countered that the laws of nature were all testimonies contrary to the testimony of miracles.
Hume wasn't steeped in a religious belief. He didn't profess a religion at all
Not so, he professed the Christian Creed and the Lords Prayer to the fishwives of Edinburgh, so they would rescue him. They were going to not life a finger to help him if he did not profess Christian faith, and to that end he lauded them as the most acute religious persons of their time! heheh
QUOTEand he actually said that the idea of God is a compound thought and that he doesn't really exist.
But....what do you think about miracles?
Because of the weight on that word, I use it or its illk infrequently. Suffice to say, in my life I have seen much that tells me humanity knows too little of Nature, Time, or Space to say what is "Natural".
| BBcode: | |
| Hide post links |
-
AYHJA
- 392
- Posts: 37990
- Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 2:25 pm
- Location: Washington, D.C.
- Contact:
I agree...
People have all these lofty things associated w/miracles...This statement by raum:
"an occurance, which because of timing or location transcends the base act itself"
That would be an accurate translation of my belief...I also agree w/parts of Hume, which to me seem to articulate the idea that we don't know enough to determine what's a miracle and what's not, just what's normal and or common...And through frequent misuse of the word, diagnosing something as a miracle almost always gives it a positive connotation, which skews discussion even further...
People have all these lofty things associated w/miracles...This statement by raum:
"an occurance, which because of timing or location transcends the base act itself"
That would be an accurate translation of my belief...I also agree w/parts of Hume, which to me seem to articulate the idea that we don't know enough to determine what's a miracle and what's not, just what's normal and or common...And through frequent misuse of the word, diagnosing something as a miracle almost always gives it a positive connotation, which skews discussion even further...
| BBcode: | |
| Hide post links |
-
Aemeth
- Posts: 1280
- Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 1:37 am
C.S. Lewis writes in his book Miracles that miraculous events are like trains, and their necessity for existing is like the train tracks. He claims that we will never see trains, aka miracles, if we do not live by the tracks. Why don't we see physical miracles that much in America? We do not need them...However, miracles seem a lot more frequent where they are needed (I am referring to physical miracles here)
Shane Claiborne writes in his book Irresistible Revolution of of tales he had heard from trusted friends off doing mission work amongst horrid 3rd world conditions. He wrote that his friends became used to miracles because they happened so much. I am talking about severed limbs being instantly healed...on a regular basis...
It seems to line up...
Shane Claiborne writes in his book Irresistible Revolution of of tales he had heard from trusted friends off doing mission work amongst horrid 3rd world conditions. He wrote that his friends became used to miracles because they happened so much. I am talking about severed limbs being instantly healed...on a regular basis...
It seems to line up...
| BBcode: | |
| Hide post links |
-
raum
- Posts: 3944
- Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 10:51 am
QUOTE(Aemeth @ May 24 2007, 09:01 PM) C.S. Lewis writes in his book Miracles that miraculous events are like trains, and their necessity for existing is like the train tracks. He claims that we will never see trains, aka miracles, if we do not live by the tracks. Why don't we see physical miracles that much in America? We do not need them...However, miracles seem a lot more frequent where they are needed (I am referring to physical miracles here)
With complete respect to Mr. Lewis, I think he is speaking more of serendipity at this time, and I can't help but notice he speaks of a transit line, and it was on a bus line he had a crisis of conscious that resulted in his becoming a Christain. I'd also like to know why you think America is a place where we don't see physical miracles "that much." /wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />
I know this, in most cultures where miracles are still observed to happen, the people have close ties to their cultural roots and rituals. There local witch-crafts (not as in some airbrushed wicca) are well integrated into the local culture and these often blend into the Pathos established by missionaries. I have found that those who have earned a more forensic approach to religion and their own heritage are not want for miracles nor wonders.
QUOTEShane Claiborne writes in his book Irresistible Revolution of of tales he had heard from trusted friends off doing mission work amongst horrid 3rd world conditions. He wrote that his friends became used to miracles because they happened so much. I am talking about severed limbs being instantly healed...on a regular basis...
It seems to line up...
I seen this cat. He's one of the peeps in Philly. Cool guy with a tremendous heart, but the life of the Friar is what he really lives, not the life of Christos. I also think he has a few screws that might need to be tightened before he lets the liberalism leak out even more. He also loves to project somehow a communist existence is a christian existence, when done in humility. But many a man dedicated to God has no scope of politics. and antoher thing,.. Iesu was not homeless, but he on the road alot.
vertical,
raum
With complete respect to Mr. Lewis, I think he is speaking more of serendipity at this time, and I can't help but notice he speaks of a transit line, and it was on a bus line he had a crisis of conscious that resulted in his becoming a Christain. I'd also like to know why you think America is a place where we don't see physical miracles "that much." /wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />
I know this, in most cultures where miracles are still observed to happen, the people have close ties to their cultural roots and rituals. There local witch-crafts (not as in some airbrushed wicca) are well integrated into the local culture and these often blend into the Pathos established by missionaries. I have found that those who have earned a more forensic approach to religion and their own heritage are not want for miracles nor wonders.
QUOTEShane Claiborne writes in his book Irresistible Revolution of of tales he had heard from trusted friends off doing mission work amongst horrid 3rd world conditions. He wrote that his friends became used to miracles because they happened so much. I am talking about severed limbs being instantly healed...on a regular basis...
It seems to line up...
I seen this cat. He's one of the peeps in Philly. Cool guy with a tremendous heart, but the life of the Friar is what he really lives, not the life of Christos. I also think he has a few screws that might need to be tightened before he lets the liberalism leak out even more. He also loves to project somehow a communist existence is a christian existence, when done in humility. But many a man dedicated to God has no scope of politics. and antoher thing,.. Iesu was not homeless, but he on the road alot.
vertical,
raum
| BBcode: | |
| Hide post links |
-
Aemeth
- Posts: 1280
- Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 1:37 am
In the "developed world" we have an astounding technological and medical advantage over the underdeveloped. If you grant that most miracles are somewhat related to these medical and technological realms, then I would argue that this is the reason Mr. Star Spangled Banner doesn't see cripples rising on a day to day basis...
Raum, what exactly do you mean by "life of a Friar"?
Raum, what exactly do you mean by "life of a Friar"?
| BBcode: | |
| Hide post links |