Quote:
Originally Posted by Itse
Essentially, Hume stated, with decent backing arguments, that a rational mind never believes in miracles since there is always a more likely explanation. However, he left quite blatantly open that this doesn't mean that miracles couldn't happen. Which is, in a way, true, if you think of miracles as "stuff you'd never have thought of as possible".
The problem with this logic is of course that even if miracles would happen, a person who is "rational" in the way Hume describes here would still disbelieve them, no matter how much the evidence mounted. Every single miracle is discounted, and thus every following miracle would be discounted, and so on.
|
Sure that makes sense if you create some definition of a rational person that would disbelieve anything, but that doesn't make any sense.
A rational person would change their mind in light of new evidence. If the miracle is that wood floats and I refuse to believe it despite floating down the river on a log, then that's not the sign of a rational mind but rather an irrational mind!
If I get to redefine words my way I can say anything I want
That's the point behind science.. the "miracle" is something that is unknown BUT that is real, therefore can eventually be understood and in theory reproduced.