Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Miracles - Coggle Diagram
Miracles
Comparison of the Key ideas of David Hume and Maurice Wiles on Miraclers
Hume’s understanding of Miralces
For Scottish Philopsher David Hume-Miracles can be defined as a Transgression of the laws of nature, that has been willed by the deity of God. Finally Miracles have to be willed by an Invisible Agent.
Hume’s main inductive argument against Miracles
The most improbable event would be a violation of the laws of nature because the evidence of the firm and unalterable experience on which the law is based must by definition, contradict, the claim that a miracle has happened. For example, repeated and tested experience shows that we cannot walk on water
Therefore by definition the reported even it maximally impossible
Hume’s strategy means that if a witness claims to have experienced a miracle-they are either lying-or mistaken
Witness Testimony has to become more reliable in direct proportion to the improbability of what the witness claims to have observed. The More improbable the claim-the more reliable the witness has to be. )
Hume’s supporting arguments from psychology
most accounts of miracles come form ignorant and barbarous nations and where they are found in civilised countries, that is because they had ignorant and barbarous ancestors
humans are also naturally credulous. The feeling of surprise and wonder arising from miracles is enough to make people with common sense less sensible
Looking back through history, we cannot find one example of Miralces properly attested by men of sufficient good sense, integrity, education,and learning. None of these miracle accounts are provided by reliable sources
Miracles stories are also debunked by conflicting miracle claims amoung the different religions. Each religion claims that their miracles were preformed by their Gods, or brought about by Karma.
Hume’s account is inductive-and provides an argument that is “As close to proof as possible”. However Hume’s argument that there are no properly attested miracles by men of sufficient good sense -contradicts his own comments about the Roman Historian Tacitus who reported on Miracles-In this Hume’s describes Tacitus as “Noted for candour and veracity, and withal, the greatest and most penetrating genius, of all”
Therefore the probability that the whiteness is lying-is always higher than the probability of the event actually happening.
Wiles critique of miracles
Wiles main argument is that God does not act through the world through miracles. Wiles argues that past view that God acts and interferes in worldly affairs through miracles is false. This is because if God were to be seen to doing this-God would be seen as being unfair-and acting immorally.
If God is using Miracles to help people-then the whole idea of Miracles becomes religiously unsatisfactory-and highly selective in their Character
If God were seen as intervening selectively to save some but not others-the problem of evil would be unsolvable-as their is no reason God cannot intervene all the time
Overall both Hume and Wiles assumptions and character is completely Different. For example Hume is an atheist-whereas Wiles is a Christian-Hume assumes that Christianity is irrational-whereas Wiles bases his process of thoughts in the bases of Christianity. Finally-Hume’s approach is realist as he assumes that accounts of Miracles in the Bible are false-Wiles however uses his Anti-Realist approach and much of this Biblical criticism to prove that much of the Bible is symbolic.
Different Understandings of Miracle
Realism
Those who are Realists generally accept that the best Scientific theories give us the best description of the world.
Moreover these theories also give us true descriptions of things we believe to exist but which cannot be observed. finally Realsist believe that the world is mind-independent-meaning it exists the way it is.
In regards to Miracles this means that those who hold Realist perspectives belive that Miracles are real events brought about by God.
Realist examples of Miracles
Miracles as an extraordinary coincidence of a favourable name
Juliane Keopeke was a German-Peruvian high school student who in 1971 was on board flight 508 from Lima when it encountered a thunderstorm and crashed from a height of over 10,000 feet, killing 85/86 of the passangers. Juliane was the sole survivor, suffering a broken collar broke-and enduring a 9 day trek through the Jungle.
In 1950 a gas expolosion in Nebraska demolished a whole Church-however all 15 members who were to attend were late-and so survived
There are problems with describing these events as Religious Miracles-For example when referring to the case of Juliane-Why did God only save her-and leave the other pasangers to die-Moreover why did God decide to manipulate the church goers personal experience and save them by making them late-yet not save the countless other victims of other natural disasters
Miracles as an event brought about by the power of God or another spiritiual power
The Bible contains several accounts of God acting through people to enact miracles-For example in Exlodus 7-8-11-10-when Moses actions on carrying out the ten plagues on Egypt are given through the power of Yahweh
Moses was also instructed by God on how to preform the great miracles of Isreal’s deliverance when trapped between the sea and the pursuing of Egyptian Chariots-Exodus 13-17-14-22)
Miracles like these are not intended to satisfy people’s curiosity regarding God-instead they are aimed at strengthening people’s faith-as well as inviting further belief in God.
Miracles as a violation of natural law
natural law defines what is possible-and what is not possible for nature to achieve when left on it’s own. So therefore Miracles become something that could not have happened only by nature when it is left alone. Which means it is an event brought about by a supernatural power such as God.
The Classic example of Miracles is presented by David Hume who describes Miracles as a
-A transgression of a law of nature
-Actet by a particular violation-an act of will
-by the deity or intervention of an invisible agent
Australian Philospher John Mackey agreed with the premise of external intervention into a closed system-Even though Mackie was an athiest-he still believed the idea of God’s intervention is conceivable
2 more items...
Anti-Realsim
Those who hold Anti-realist view generally argue that we can have no knowledge of a mind independent world-this means that Ant-Realists do not believe in any commitment to God or to anything unobservable such as our senses
Therefore those who hold Anti-Realist views regarding Miracles will they cannot be from miraculous interventions by a Transcendent God.
This view of Miracles is supported by Paul Tillich who defined Miracles as an event which is “Astonishing, unusual,shaking, without contradicting the structure of Reality”-moreover for this event to be considers it must both point to the mystery of being-and be a sign/symbol-within a religious experience.
Overall Tilech’s view of Miralces is Anti-real-as there is no commitment to the idea of God as a being who is transcendent-no law of nature is violated-others would observe the same events but not see them as miracles
Although not Anti-Realist John HJick’s view is still usefull. For John Hick the idea of Miracles must be an event to which we become vividly aware and conscious of God acting towards us. This is a must have for Hick-as even if the event breaks natural law-it can only be a Miracle if it open our eyes to God
Another Anti-Realist approach that is presented is through that of R.F-Holland-Fofr Holland all Miracldes happened to be nothing more then confidedes that can be interpreted in a religious-Such as shown in the ‘Mother-Railway-Example”
The Problem with Anti-Realist approaches is that they can vary depending on the situation-and Are not consistent. They can vary depending on the hopes-values-and intentions of the people involved.