Swineburne’s View On The Possibility Of Miracles Flashcards
What does Hume reject regarding miracles?
Hume seems to reject the possibility of rational belief in miracles.
What is Swinburne’s position on rational belief in miracles?
Swinburne (1934 -) argues, in his book The Concept of Miracle (1970), that there can be evidence that a law of nature has been violated and so accepts that rational belief in miracles is possible.
What phrase did Swinburne use to describe a miracle?
Swinburne used the phrase “a non- repeatable counter-instance to a law of nature.” from Ninian Smart. He avoids Hume’s definition of a ‘violation’ of the laws of nature as it is an insufficient analogy between laws of nature and moral laws.
How does Swinburne define a non-repeatable counter-instance to a law of nature?
1) if an event occurred that was contrary to the predictions of a law, and we had reason to believe this would not occur again in a similar circumstance, then it is assumed to be a law of nature. 2) if we tried to modify the law of nature to try to predict events, the modified law of nature would give false predictions in other circumstances. 3) an unmodified law will give co predictions in all other conceivable circumstances.
What is Antony Flew’s comment on Hume’s rejection of historical evidence?
Antony Flew commented that the reason Hume rejects historical evidence and favours the law of nature is because the historical evidence often appeals to a singular past event that is no longer possible to examine directly.
What does Swinburne say about the support provided by historical and scientific evidence?
both historical and scientific evidence give only limited support to any claim. Also, both can be tested at any time by any person: it is not just written or verbal testimony. He emphasised the importance of the character mind and competence of the original witnesses; physical trace of the event; present effects resulting from the event. He says “Whether there is such evidence is, of course, another matter.”
What must a non-repeatable counter-instance of a law of nature be caused by to be considered a miracle?
It has to be caused by a god. If there is other evidence for the existence of God, then an event consistent with God’s character, Swinburne argues, it is reasonable to believe that God caused the event.
What does Swinburne argue about events consistent with God’s character?
God is of an omnibenevolent nature, thus may be expected to intervene through miracles to show love and compassion for his creation.
What is Sanchez’s view on miracles?
Sanchez said “Every person is a miracle. Every moment is a miracle. If only we can open our eyes, we’ll see God’s love everywhere.”
What is Hume’s argument regarding miracles in different religious traditions and how does Swinburne respond?
Hume maintains that miracles in different religious traditions were contradictory and self-cancelling. Swinburne responds by suggesting that this argument is only valid if two miracles were in conflict and incompatible.
What example does Swinburne provide to illustrate non-conflicting miracles?
He highlights that the most alleged miracles do not give rise to conflict: for example, a Roman Catholic priest might be praying for a miracle to demonstrate the truth of the doctrine of transubstantiation when the tabernacle containing the Sacrament levitated.
What did Ramakrishna state about religions?
Ramakrishna stated that “all religions are true”, concluding that the ‘One’, eternal, undivided being is at the heart of all traditions; the cause of all miracles is the universal God, thus eradicating conflict.
What does Ramakrishna show that all religions are one?
He advocated “God is one and only […] Different people call him by different names […] opinions are but paths. Each religion is only a path leading to God, as rivers come from different directions and ultimately become one in the ocean.” A miracle in the context of Hinduism and Islam will not usually show that specific details of their respective religions to be true. Most would only show the power of God and their concern for the needs of people.
What does Swinburne question about Hume’s standards of evidence?
Swinburne accepts Hume’s three arguments against miracles involving credibility of witnesses. However, he highlights the standards of evidence that Hume sets are very high, questioning what exactly constitutes a number of witnesses. For instance, Hume’s example of the Tomb of Abbé Paris: considers the credibility of the witnesses in terms of their number, integrity and education as irrelevant though it is of exceptional quality.
What is the ‘Principle of Credulity’ according to Swinburne?
He also points to the ‘Principle of Credulity’, suggesting that what one rationally seems to perceive is probably the case, thus miracles do exist: he says “how things seem to be is usually a good guide to how they are.”
What does Hume argue about religious believers and miracles?
Hume suggests a religious believer may know the miracle is false but due to vested interest and bias, “perseveres in it, with the best intentions in the world, for the sake of promoting so holy a cause.” This easily account for delusions about miracles as Hume argued that religious people have a psychological need to believe in miracles: “A religionist may imagine he sees what has no reality.”
What does Swinburne say about honest descriptions of miraculous events?
Swinburne however, points to the fact that there are people who are entirely honest in their description of a miraculous event. Swinburne also comments that Hume seems to identify an ignorant nation as one that believes in miracles: to him, this connection would seem unjustified.
How does Swinburne suggest weighing conflicting evidence?
For weighing conflicting evidence, Swinburne suggests different kinds of evidence ought to carry different weight: our own memory would count for more than the testimony of another witness, for example. The degree of empirical evidence may also be available to distinguish the reliability of a testimony.
What did Nash suggest about implausible events and scientific advance?
Nash suggested that if highly implausible sounding events were always discounted, then there would be no scientific advance: miracles potentially leave verifiable evidence, and in the case of Jesus’s resurrection, the evidence of the rise of the Christian church can have no other reasonable explanation but that this resurrection must have really occurred.
What does Craig argue about uniform experience and miracles?
Finally, multiple similar testimonies ought to be given more weight and validity as it adds an element of persuasiveness and universality. Craig said “To say that uniform experience is against miracles is to implicitly assume already that miracles have never occurred.”
