![]() In this episode, I finish off this series with my own personal evaluation of Hume’s two-step argument against the possiblity of rationally relying on testimonial evidence for religious miracles. David Hume & Miracles (Part 2)- Refuting Hume’s “Abject Failure” Argument Obivously most philsoophers go for the TEP or transmission notion whereby knowledge has to be had by the speaker and then transmitted to the hearer, but Lackey’s paper is challenging this mainstream view and giving counter-examples to show that TEP (transmission of knwoledge from speaker to hearer) is neither necessary nor sufficient”. “ Two major mess ups that I made in this video ġ) I said David Hume would be a global reductionist in terms of testimony/testimonial evidence- this is wrong, he would be an example of a local reductionist as he gives general positive reasons for thinking testimony is generally reliable, but that isn’t good enough for him as he would say one needs local indpeednant positive reasons for la given localized miracle claim.Ģ) I also said that Lackey thinks that knowledge gained via testimony is transmitted only, but a point in my slides and in her paper contrdicts this, actually she thinks (and I also think) that most of the time it is transmitted, but it need not be such as in some cases (i.e., her creationist teacher example) knowledge can actually be generated in the hearer even if the speaker/testifier lacks that knowledge in terms of the propositions they are testifying to. In Part 2, I will provide my own in-depth evaluation/analysis, where I refute every single premise of Hume’s outdated and utterly fallacious argument- let’s just say I will conclusively demonsrate that Hume’s argument on miracles lives up to its reputation as an “abject failure”!Īudio Link = –Miracles-Part-1–The-Relevant-Background-Knowledge-e1oqudg YouTube Video #1 UPDATE NOTE: Finally, I provide a general outline on some background knowledge about the modern philosophical feild known as the “Epistemology of Testimony”. Furthermore, I outline world-renowned Christian philosopher Richard Swinburne’s devastating critique of Hume’s argument on this front. In this episode, I go over the relevant background knowledge outlining David Hume’s famous (or rather infamous) argument against testimonial evidence for miracles. David Hume & Miracles (Part 1)- The Relevant Background Knowledge
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |