Hume's Abject Failure: The Argument Against Miracles

by John Earman

This vital study offers a new interpretation of Hume's famous "Of Miracles," which notoriously argues against the possibility of miracles. By situating Hume's popular argument in the context of the eighteenth-century debate on miracles, Earman shows Hume's argument to be largely unoriginal and chiefly without merit where it is original. Yet Earman constructively conceives how progress can be made on the issues that Hume's essay so provocatively posed about the ability of eyewitness testimony to establish the credibility of marvelous and miraculous events.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Atheism

232 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2000

Reviews

[Stephen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Earman, who is not sympathetic to theism, provides an excellent critical monograph against Hume’s influential argument against miracles. The book selves deeply into Bayesian formulas which may make it a hard reading for some; however Earman always summarizes his findings making it easier for the reader. Really this book—or at least excerpts from it—should be required reading for all philosophy majors who have been captivated by Hume’s argument.

[Logan · Rating 5 out of 5]

While I would refrain from elaborating why I would consider Dr. Earman my new philosophical spirit animal - as I would find myself compelled to engage any number of topics if it were to silence the sneering of the pretentious - I would say that this book systematically dismantles Hume's abject failure to produce an "in principle" argument against miracles.

[Kim · Rating 2 out of 5]

Anyone who has ACTUALLY READ Hume's argument knows it is unsubstantiated and mostly a rant, which became very popular because everyone liked Hume's conclusion. Earman therefore, says nothing new, in my opinion. My biggest problem remains; who in their right mind would use probability to prove or disprove miracles?! Two stars because Earman wrote a nice, organized argument.

[Danny Barulli · Rating 4 out of 5]

It was a very challenging read. I think you have to really understand Hume.

[Daniel · Rating 3 out of 5]

Knowing probability calculus is a huge plus to grasp the argument.