Swinburne vs Hume---What is a Miracle?

                              some of us see miracles as unseen. 

            to some, waking up in the morning is a miracle. 
                         A miracle is in the eye of the beholder.

Swinburne and Hume 

Interpretations of Miracles

According to Webster’s Dictionary, a miracle is something extraordinary or surprising. A miracle is also defined as a surprising and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific law and is therefore considered to be the work of a divine agency. Although there is nothing specifying that there must be evidence and it must be a one-time occurrence, Hume and Swinburne have their own requirements about what it takes to be considered a miracle. They both require evidence, but Swinburne gives evidence the time of day, while Hume really believes there is nothing that could persuade him to believe anything is out of the law of nature. 

Hume believed miracles to be a violation of the law of nature. “Miracles” to Hume are something that happens that breaks the laws of nature. Hume states the occurrence of miracles is so rare that it’s irrational and illogical to believe they occur at all because evidence collected shows the laws of nature cannot be broken. Hume believes miracles happen (if they do at all) to uneducated, ignorant, and barbarous people, and are false because they fail to prove the religions they come from are in fact true.

Hume’s argument on how miracles happen to uneducated people is a confusing argument because he never says what is required in order to be an “educated” person. Even if he believes miracles happen only to uneducated people, why can’t they happen to educated people, who know the laws of nature? Hume’s evidence to support miracles is to have memories of the experience, people must provide testimony about the experience, physical traces of the event, and understanding modern science and what is thought physically impossible or most improbable. Hume believes it is only a miracle if it has never been observed in any age or country. Hume’s main conclusion is that a miracle does not exist unless it has evidence that shows the laws of nature were broken.

            Swinburne and Hume both argue that natural laws are based on people’s experiences of observing the world. He suggests a miracle is an occurrence of a non-repeatable counter instance to a law of nature. Swinburne supports the idea of God performing miracles. So, if something happens more than once, he asks, do we have evidence to believe it is a law of nature? Swinburne asks what evidence would be needed in order for someone to believe you have had a miracle. He challenges Hume’s idea because Hume believes that you can only have a miracle if you can prove it even occurred. Because if you try to say you have evidence, but it has happened multiple times in the past, Hume will not become persuaded to believe it is in fact, a miracle. Swinburne says that after the evidence is identified, you have to assess it and establish a conclusion and use factors in discussion about interpreting events in the past. He believes you can either accept as many sources of evidence as possible, or find evidence that shows to be consistent, and having empirical reliability it should not be rejected if relevant without good reason.

          Swinburne brings up the principle of credulity which states that if it seems to one person that x is present, then x is probably present. It is reasonable to believe that the world is probably as we experience it to be, unless we have some specific reason to question a religious experience. If we do, then we ought to accept that it is evidence for the existence of God. Swinburne’s main conclusion is “that there are no logical difficulties in supposing that there could be strong historical evidence for the occurrence of miracles”.    

Crohn's Disease- Miracle or Coincidence? 
Do you believe it is a  miracle or coincidence that she became healed? 

*If a miracle were to happen to you, do you think you could have any evidence to explain it? And if not, would you still claim it as a miracle?

*Do you believe the word miracle is used loosely in today’s society? Seeing that people believe waking up in the morning is considered a miracle but happens every day.

*Have any of you heard of any miracles, or had any personal occurrences?