A scientific and philosophic response to David Hume's essay "Of miracles" of 1748 / 1777

Thomas Varallo M.A.

Etd

A scientific and philosophic response to David Hume's essay "Of miracles" of 1748 / 1777

Publique Deposited

MLA citation style (9th ed.)

Thomas Varallo M.A. A Scientific and Philosophic Response to David Hume's Essay "of Miracles" of 1748 / 1777. rim.ir.atla.com/concern/etds/0bd68134-5726-48c4-aed4-31c5eb2cec3f?locale=fr.

APA citation style (7th ed.)

T. V. M.a. A scientific and philosophic response to David Hume's essay "Of miracles" of 1748 / 1777. https://rim.ir.atla.com/concern/etds/0bd68134-5726-48c4-aed4-31c5eb2cec3f?locale=fr

Chicago citation style (CMOS 17, author-date)

Thomas Varallo M.A. A Scientific and Philosophic Response to David Hume's Essay "of Miracles" of 1748 / 1777. https://rim.ir.atla.com/concern/etds/0bd68134-5726-48c4-aed4-31c5eb2cec3f?locale=fr.

Note: These citations are programmatically generated and may be incomplete.

Créateur

Thomas Varallo M.A.

Déclaration des droits

In Copyright

Abstrait

David Hume’s argument “Of Miracles” is considered the most famous and effective argument against miracles ever devised. Hume did not argue that miracles were impossible, but that the evidence in favor of a report of a miracle has never, and will never, outweigh the firm, unalterable experience of natural law. He argues that based on natural law (ontology) it is not reasonable to believe (epistemology) a report of a miracle. Thus Hume’s argument is epistemological, but based on ontological experience. This thesis argues that empirical scientific advances on human hemoglobin protein structure, and advances in philosophy of language and simplicity in the laws of nature, have exposed ontological weaknesses in Hume’s essay “Of Miracles” which serve to counter his epistemological conclusions, even when accepting naturalist presuppositions.

Année