Miracles and Christian History
Dateline: April 19, 2000
"MIRACLES & CHRISTIAN HISTORY" > Page 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6
Hume & Experience
Having laid some groundwork, let's take a look at one of my favorite passages from David Hume:
It is experience only, which gives authority to human testimony; and it is the same experience, which assures us of the laws of nature. When, therefore, these two kinds of experience are contrary, we have nothing to do but subtract the one from the other, and embrace an opinion, either on one side or the other, with that assurance which arises from the remainder. But according to the principle here explained, this subtraction, with regard to all popular religions, amounts to an entire annihilation; and therefore we may establish it as a maxim, that no human testimony can have such force as to prove a miracle, and make it a just foundation for any such religion.
- David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding
If that seems tough to understand, don't worry - we'll take a closer look at the parts later on.
Although it is beyond proof that nature follows any laws, as we have seen it is necessary to assume it so since otherwise human knowledge would be impossible. But assuming that there is a natural order, the only way we can become acquainted with it is by experience and experience alone. However uncertain (and one does not have to work very hard at it to find a host of potential problems), the individual has no other guide.
Unfortunately, we cannot each personally verify via direct personal experience all of the items we nevertheless would wish to consider as being knowledge. We cannot each perform electron beam experiments to verify the basic results of quantum mechanics, nor can each of us personally examine such early documents as exist for Christianity. I'm virtually certain that only a bare handful of people in the world could get in to examine the two precious (and each incomplete) copies of 'The Annals of Imperial Rome' of Tacitus. Nor can we each, however talented we may be, acquire professional credentials in all the fields of human endeavor.
Whom to Trust?
All this means that we have to have some way of deciding whose word to trust and what authority to accept (at least, once we become cognizant of the epistemological problems we face - most people never stop to ponder such issues, but lack of recognition of a problem doesn't make it go away).
Fundamentally, the only guide we have to the reliability of the testimony of others is how well that testimony accords with our own experience. I suggest that we acquire and advance our knowledge thus:
- Our basic knowledge of how our environment works starts being acquired as soon as we are neurologically capable of learning. We experience, for example, the enduring existence of objects even when they are out our immediate sight; 'hot' and 'cold'; that if you want to pick the blanket up you can't be standing on it. At this same time we are also leaning to apply linguistic labels to the objects, actions, results, etc. that accompany our experiences.
- Along with our direct experience, we learn from whom and how to recognize reasonably reliable testimony regarding objects/events that we have not directly experienced.
- As our body of experience grows, we weigh new experiences or testimony against our past experience and proportion our belief according to how consistent the new item is with everything we already know.
The triumph of modern science can be viewed as the result of a self-conscious and refined application of #3 to the natural world which also yields results that everyone can experience.
Next page > History, Archaeology & Miracles
> Page 1 , 2 , 3
, 4 , 5 , 6
|
Get weekly updates about what's new on the site and news from around the world: |
|
|
