The Argument From Miracles
-?There must always be a presumption against the occurrence of a miracle?.. The evidence for a miracle will always be weaker than the evidence for some other hypothesis; why? Lot of evidence in support of the laws of nature (gravity).. That there is much less or no evidence that states it?s a miracle (something going against nature or man-kinds natural abilities).
-Additional argument: ?People tell lies & make mistakes. It is much more likely that a person in question has lied and/or made a mistake than the person overturned the laws of nature.?
Arguments against Hume?s ?miracle thesis?s?:
-Do unexplainable, extraordinary events happen in real life? This must be true, despite Hume?s above arguments
-Can we be certain that science will explain all such ?miracles? (extraordinary events)? No, we can never be sure; despite advances, scientists will never be omniscient. It is therefore not impossible that the answers to some questions will never be explained.
(The purpose of living etc.)
An argument complying with Hume?s anti-religious philosophies:
-Does the fact that the human race has some unanswerable questions prove the existence of God? No. The existence of humanly unanswerable questions does not prove there is a being out there, such as God, which is omniscient.
Argument From Design
Hume heavily criticizes (?chief critic?) the concept that the universe is so perfect (natural planet movement, human brain etc); it must have been designed by an excelling designer.
-Even if we could prove the universe had a designer, it would not show if the designer was a person; wise or good. Additionally, it does not tell us which religion is the ?right?, or true, one.
-The universe in NOT an artefact, it is merely the product of a natural reproductive cycle;...