Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same journal

Are patient-centered constructs measurable?

Studies in history and philosophy of science·2026
Same journal

Transferring ways of thinking and mathematizing: The statistical approach between physics and biology.

Studies in history and philosophy of science·2026
Same journal

The Dynamics of Quantum Gravity: The Missing Piece in the Spacetime Emergentist Account.

Studies in history and philosophy of science·2026
Same journal

A frame-based approach for reconstructing theories.

Studies in history and philosophy of science·2026
Same journal

Strategic ignorance, and the management of performative effects: Lessons from climate economics.

Studies in history and philosophy of science·2026
Same journal

Fictionalism and scientific realism: A response to ungrounded criticism.

Studies in history and philosophy of science·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Mar 30, 2026

Real-time Video Projection in an MRI for Characterization of Neural Correlates Associated with Mirror Therapy for Phantom Limb Pain
11:29

Real-time Video Projection in an MRI for Characterization of Neural Correlates Associated with Mirror Therapy for Phantom Limb Pain

Published on: April 20, 2019

10.5K

David Hume's no-miracles argument begets a valid No-Miracles Argument.

Colin Howson1

  • 1London School of Economics and Political Science, London WC2A 2AE, UK.

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science
|November 17, 2015
PubMed
Summary

David Hume's argument on miracles is analyzed. Attempts to link Hume's criterion to Bayesian probability fail, but it validates a key philosophical argument for scientific realism.

Keywords:
Bayes's TheoremHumeMiraclesNo-Miracles ArgumentProbabilityTestimony

More Related Videos

How to Create and Use Binocular Rivalry
14:34

How to Create and Use Binocular Rivalry

Published on: November 10, 2010

77.1K
Experimental Glaucoma Induced by Ocular Injection of Magnetic Microspheres
06:35

Experimental Glaucoma Induced by Ocular Injection of Magnetic Microspheres

Published on: February 2, 2015

18.0K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Mar 30, 2026

Real-time Video Projection in an MRI for Characterization of Neural Correlates Associated with Mirror Therapy for Phantom Limb Pain
11:29

Real-time Video Projection in an MRI for Characterization of Neural Correlates Associated with Mirror Therapy for Phantom Limb Pain

Published on: April 20, 2019

10.5K
How to Create and Use Binocular Rivalry
14:34

How to Create and Use Binocular Rivalry

Published on: November 10, 2010

77.1K
Experimental Glaucoma Induced by Ocular Injection of Magnetic Microspheres
06:35

Experimental Glaucoma Induced by Ocular Injection of Magnetic Microspheres

Published on: February 2, 2015

18.0K

Area of Science:

  • Philosophy of Science
  • Epistemology
  • History of Philosophy

Background:

  • David Hume's essay 'Of Miracles' remains a significant point of philosophical debate.
  • Hume proposed a balance-of-probabilities criterion for evaluating testimony regarding miracles.
  • This criterion has been a subject of contention, particularly concerning its relation to Bayesian probability.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To critically examine attempts to reconcile Hume's criterion for miracles with Bayesian methodology.
  • To demonstrate the failure of these attempts to align Hume's criterion with Bayesian posterior probabilities.
  • To establish the validity of Hume's criterion in generating a form of the No-Miracles Argument.

Main Methods:

  • Philosophical analysis of David Hume's 'Of Miracles'.
  • Critique of Bayesian interpretations of Hume's balance-of-probabilities criterion.
  • Reconstruction and validation of the No-Miracles Argument based on Hume's criterion.

Main Results:

  • Attempts to map Hume's criterion onto Bayesian posterior probabilities are shown to be unsuccessful.
  • Hume's balance-of-probabilities criterion is demonstrated to be a valid foundation for the No-Miracles Argument.
  • Modern realist philosophers' presentations of the No-Miracles Argument are found to be invalid, despite their use of probabilistic tools.

Conclusions:

  • Hume's criterion for evaluating testimony about miracles, while not directly Bayesian, has significant philosophical utility.
  • The study validates a crucial component of the No-Miracles Argument, strengthening realist philosophy of science.
  • It highlights a potential flaw in contemporary philosophical arguments for scientific realism.