Of Miracles David Hume Analysis

Hume’s notion of causation is his regularity theory. Hume explains his regularity theory in two ways: (1) “we may define a cause to be an object, followed by another, and where all the objects similar to the first are followed by objects similar to the second” (2) “if the first object had not been, the second never had existed.”

Once Hume establishes the ultimate source of knowledge, he then attempts to probe into the various types of ideas, and how ideas relate to one another ?  He suggests that all ideas are related in one of three ways:  First, Hume utilizes the concept of resemblance.  He explains this concept through an analogy of a photograph.  In his words, "a picture naturally leads our thoughts to the original."3  The basic idea here is that an impression leads one to remember the object, which one has experienced.  The second way in which ideas give rise to one another is through Contiguity.  Basically, contiguity suggests that thinking of one object inevitably leads one a discourse concerning the others.  The third way Hume offers is that of Cause and Effect.  This seems to be the most obvious of the three.  When we think of a cause, we invariably envision its effect.  When we imagine placing our hand on a hot stove, we generally accompany that idea with its perceived effect, i.e. getting burned.  These principles, which Hume refers to as "connexions", form the "glue" that bind all ideas together.

The idea of a miracle and its context depends on the definition in which it is used; the first definition of a miracle is a “transgression of the laws of nature” such as walking on water. This was used by Hume who stated that for a miracle to occur a law of nature must be broken, with this focus on laws of nature he aimed to show that it is irrational to believe in miracles because it is irrational to believe in a violation of any natural law, as by believing in this God becomes redundant. He puts forward the method of proportioning the belief to evidence – if you weigh up the miracle against another option what is more likely? That a miracle, a transgression of a law of nature, has occurred or

This paper will demonstrate why Hume thinks accepting testimony about a miracle is unreasonable and why he is incorrect. It will do so by first presenting Hume's argument as to why miracles are improbable. Second it will present Hume's four main justifications for not accepting miracles. Finally it will present how Hume's justifications are incorrect.

David Hume argues against miracles and states that they are improbable because most are reported by those who deceive others, the sensation of wonder that overrides the sense of reasoning, or because they are inapplicable to our scientific culture today. Hume addresses that in essentially all cases, the probability of a miracle truly happening, in comparison to any one of his listed reason, is highly improbable. He does not implicitly state why miracles cannot occur.

In explaining Hume’s critique of the belief in miracles, we must first understand the definition of a miracle. The Webster Dictionary defines a miracle as: a supernatural event regarded as to define action, one of the acts worked by Christ which revealed his divinity an extremely remarkable achievement or event, an unexpected piece of luck. Therefore, a miracle is based on one’s perception of past experiences, what everyone sees. It is based on an individuals own reality, and the faith in which he/she believes in, it is based on interior events such as what we are taught, and exterior events, such as what we hear or see first hand. When studying Hume’s view of a miracle, he interprets or defines a miracle as such; a miracle is a

Hume’s other two arguments entail the human attraction to miracle stories because of their wonder and entertainment, as well as the tendency for miracle stories to occur chiefly amongst “ignorant and barbarous” people, with those who are civilized only believing in miracles because they have been passed down from “ignorant and barbarous” ancestors. Hume explains that miracle stories only survive the test of time not because of their truth, but rather because of they are sensational, and that an enlightened individual would never truly believe in a miracle because, according to Hume,

Hume also believed in cause and effect. I believe in this because in order for something to happen something needed to cause

It is evident in David Hume's writing of "An Equity Concerning Human Understanding" that he does not believe that miracles take place. Hume is a man of logic, who believes in experience over knowledge. Of course it is hard for such a man to believe in extraordinary claims without being there to witness them. Especially when such events require a lot of faith.

     Hume analyzed the idea of causality by emphasizing the three demands that can be verified through observation. First he argued the aspect of constant conjunction. In this aspect, the cause and effect must be spatially and constantly existent. Secondly, he

Aside from the Sun and moon, Venus seduces the heavens with its glistening brilliance as the brightest object in the sky. Beneath Venus’ radiant appearance lies a dreadfully divergent, multifaceted surface. The gentle winds and dense clouds of Venus unceasingly neutralize the atmospheric temperatures allowing the conflicting qualities to peacefully coexist. Venus orbits at a leisurely pace enchanted by the love and beauty achieved by harmonizing extreme differences. While imposing these qualities, Venus instructs people to diplomatically reconcile opposing forces, glisten in the midst of diversity, and relish in the elements of

Hume rejected lockes theory of experiencing cause. He argued that you do not feel the connection between your mind and arm, and thus don't sense the cause of the muscles contracting to raise your arm. Cause, in Hume's mind, is a synthetic experience used to explain the unobservable things in reality. To help explain he used the billiard ball experiement. Ball A is hit and put into motion towards ball B.When ball A collides with ball B the cause of ball B's movement is not experienced, there is no observable connection between the two. This would mean that there is no way to be certain that everytime Ball A collides with ball B that ball B will move, ball A could just as likely bounce off and begin rolling in a random direction. He believd that there is no way of knowing for certain the outcome of an event without being able to perceive the cause.

discovered and developed ibuprofen. There was a team dedicated to its development, the leaders were Stewart Adams, and his colleagues John Nicholson and Colin Burrows. They first started working on it in the 1950s, to help treat arthritis. Adams and his a associates uncovered a class of compounds, phenylalkanoic acids they acquired analgesic, antipyretic and anti-inflammatory properties. It involved ibuprofen, or isobutylphenyl propionic acid. Ibuprofen was first tested on cats and rats. The tests showed that ibuprofen had no impact not the cardiovascular system, nor did it have an unfavorable impact in the respiratory system. After that ibuprofen experienced substantial clinical tests. Trials were done on people that have arthritis, hyperpyrexia, and lumbago. It showed that most of them that received a daily dose of 800 milligrams- 1200 milligrams had remarkable improvement. They had a reduction of pains in their joints, stiffness, joint swelling, and symptoms of carditis. Ibuprofen was patented in the earlier part of 1961, but it was not sold until 1969. Ibuprofen was approved by the FDA, Food and Drug Administration, in 1974 and sold int the USA that year. Ibuprofen is a widely know over the counter drug, but man other drugs are the same except they

Therefore Hume claims that there is no necessary connection, it is just that we infer the idea of necessary connection but in actual fact we never actually observe it directly in nature. Hume goes on to convince us that we cannot observe the act of causation, for example he points out that we are aware of our ability to move our body i.e. fingers, hands etc. but this does not make us aware of the connection between the act volition and the movement of our body. He points out that we are capable of moving our fingers at will but we have no control over our internal organs. Why is this? Hume believes that we are incapable of rationalising a causal connection and things happen according to some sort of law, however these laws and necessities are beyond our understanding.

I'm sure everyone wants to escape the cruel world we live in. Edgar Allan Poe wrote The Masque of the Red Death and many other writings for this reason. Edgar Allan Poe wrote to emphasize escaping mortality and relate to those who want to escape life itself. Everyone has their own worlds when they look deep inside themselves. Poe had a dark past which encouraged the darkness he wrote about that gave insight to the world he had created. Each writing had its own parallel universe of Poe's.