![]() ![]() There is no Wikipedia article on Sober, but one can read his persona CV. Is his book worth our time? Amazon has one positive review of it, giving it four stars. His brother, Edward, is Professor of Philosophy at University of New Orleans. His areas of concentration are Philosophy of Religion, Metaphysics, and Epistemology. Raised in Nebraska, he earned his BA from the University of Nebraska, where he studied under Robert Audi, and his PhD from Princeton University. Johnson (born 1952) is Associate Professor of Philosophy at Yeshiva University and has previously taught at UCLA and Syracuse University. Again, let’s see if he is worth our time. One of the reviews is an alleged professor (of what?) and one is a Christian nutcase.Īlso somewhat recently another professor has challenged Hume’s maxim. Five reviews with five stars and one with four. So, let’s check some reviews of his book. ![]() But people who are not a waste of time sometimes write books that are a waste of time. He received his PhD from Princeton in 1968. He has also taught at UCLA, the Rockefeller University, and the University of Minnesota, and is president of the Philosophy of Science Association. He is currently a professor in the History and Philosophy of Science department at the University of Pittsburgh. John Earman (born 1942) is a philosopher of physics. ![]() The first thing to find our is whether he is a waste of time or not. Recently a professor has been arguing against Hume’s maxim. If the falsehood of his testimony would be more miraculous, than the event which he relates then, and not till then, can he pretend to command my belief or opinion. I weigh the one miracle against the other and according to the superiority, which I discover, I pronounce my decision, and always reject the greater miracle. The plain consequence is (and it is a general maxim worthy of our attention), “That no testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous, than the fact, which it endeavours to establish and even in that case there is a mutual destruction of arguments, and the superior only gives us an assurance suitable to that degree of force, which remains, after deducting the inferior.” When anyone tells me, that he saw a dead man restored to life, I immediately consider with myself, whether it be more probable, that this person should either deceive or be deceived, or that the fact, which he relates, should really have happened. Hume mentions this in his essay An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. My goal is to spread useful information, mostly in form of links about Hume’s maxim. Contrary to what I normally do I’m not going to argue anything in this article. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |