Single Idea 7636

[catalogued under 28. God / B. Proving God / 3. Proofs of Evidence / e. Miracles]

Full Idea

In Hume's argument against miracles, how can it be more rational to believe the laws than the miracles, if the laws themselves are not based on reason?

Gist of Idea

It can't be more rational to believe in natural laws than miracles if the laws are not rational


comment on David Hume (Of Miracles [1748]) by Atif Ishaq - talk

A Reaction

A very nice question. Hume never presents his argument with such an overt reliance on reason. But if the argument says you are in the 'habit' of expecting no anomalies in the laws, what is to prevent you changing the habit of a lifetime?