miracle - The Skeptic's Dictionary (original) (raw)
What Hume has done is to take the commonsense Anglican argument against the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation and applied it to miracles, the basis of all religious sects. The laws of nature have not been established by occasional or frequent experiences of a similar kind, but of uniform experience. It is "more than probable," says Hume, that all men must die, that lead can't remain suspended in air by itself and that fire consumes wood and is extinguished by water. If someone were to report to Hume that a man could suspend lead in the air by an act of will, Hume would ask himself if "the falsehood of his testimony would be more miraculous than the event which he relates." If so, then he would believe the testimony. However, he does not believe there ever was a miraculous event established "on so full an evidence."
Consider the fact that the uniformity of experience of people around the world has been that once a human limb has been amputated, it does not grow back.1 What would you think if a friend of yours, a scientist of the highest integrity with a Ph.D. in physics from Harvard, were to tell you that she was off in Spain last summer and met a man who used to have no legs but now walks on two fine, healthy limbs. She tells you that a holy man rubbed oil on his stumps and his legs grew back. He lives in a small village and all the villagers attest to this "miracle." Your friend is convinced a miracle occurred. What would you believe? To believe in this miracle would be to reject the principle of the uniformity of experience, upon which laws of nature are based. It would be to reject a fundamental assumption of all science, that the laws of nature are inviolate. The miracle cannot be believed without abandoning a basic principle of empirical knowledge: that like things under like circumstances produce like results.
Of course there is another constant, another product of uniform experience which should not be forgotten: the tendency of people at all times in all ages to desire wondrous events, to be deluded about them, to fabricate them, embellish them, and come to believe in the absolute truth of the creations of their own passions and heated imaginations. Does this mean that miracles cannot occur? Of course not. It means, however, that when a miracle is reported the probability will always be greater that the person doing the reporting is mistaken, deluded, or a fraud than that the miracle really occurred. To believe in a miracle, as Hume said, is not an act of reason but offaith.
It is interesting to note that when the Roman Catholic Church collects data on potential saints, whose canonization requires proof of three miracles, the authorities ignore negative evidence. Millions may pray to a potential saint and all but one seems not to have had his wish granted. The Church counts the one who seems to have had her wish granted and ignores the millions who came up empty and died without intercession. Likewise, when the media report on natural disasters, they are fond of the story of the survivor who thanks some god and basks in the glory of the miracle that saved him, but they never print a story blaming a god for the thousands or hundreds of thousands who were killed in the earthquake or the tsunami. It doesn't occur to the survivor or the media that if it was just circumstance that led to the deaths of thousands, it was also merely circumstance that led to anyone surviving.
See alsocollective hallucination, faith,incorruptible body,John of god, Littlewood's law, Lourdes, magick, prayer,saint,Satan, Wicca, witches,Zeitoun, andwhy people believe in miracles,'tis the season of miracles,the Eucharist and the Slider, andmy review of "Signs from God [sic]."
- Anatole France, upon seeing the discarded canes and crutches on a visit to Lourdes, said: "What, no wooden legs?"
**further reading
books and articles
Hume, David. An Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X "Of Miracles," (1748), Bobbs-Merrill, Library of Liberal Arts edition.
de Spinoza, Benedict. A Theological Political Treatise, ch. 6, "Of Miracles" (1670).
websites
Miracles and Modern Scientific Thought Professor Norman Geisler
"Miracles" in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Examining Miracle Claims by Joe Nickell
Worcestor Bishop Releases Preliminary Findings in Audrey Santo Case by Joe Nickell
Miracles from the Skeptiseum
Rationalists Doubt Mother Teresa's MiracleOct 8, 2002
Last updated 12-Sep-2014