David Hume and the Mysterious Shroud of Turin

Bibliographic Data

ID20311573
AuthorsEdward L Schoen (Western Kentucky University, corresponding author)
Year1991
Volume27
Issue2
Pages209-222
Publication date1991-06-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueReligious Studies (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0034-4125 • E-ISSN: 1469-901X
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/s0034412500020850
OpenAlexW2110758501
LanguageEN
References cited14

In a footnote to ‘Of Miracles’, David Hume defined the miraculous as ‘... a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the Deity, or by the interposition of some invisible agent .’ In the opening pages of the essay itself, however, Hume dropped the reference to agency in favour of the simpler declaration that any ‘ ... miracle is a violation of the laws of nature ...’ This preference for the simpler formulation was deliberate. According to Hume, it was their violation of natural law that provided the genuinely intimidating obstacle against miracles. As the course of his argument makes clear, Hume believed that the massive accumulation of evidence supporting the regularity of nature invariably would overwhelm any meagre reports to the contrary. For this reason alone, questions of divine agency could be ignored as purely academic

Agency (philosophy) · Argument (complex analysis) · Epistemology · Miracle · Natural (archaeology) · Natural law · Theology · Evolution and Science Education · History · Philosophy · Philosophy and History of Science · Science and Climate Studies

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub