Q&A: Rabbi Michi, Hume, and Divine Providence
Rabbi Michi, Hume, and Divine Providence
Question
Hello,
You criticized David Hume regarding miracles. One of your arguments was that he begs the question. He rules out the possibility of miracles… So it is no wonder that no event or claim would convince him to believe in miracles.
How are you different from Hume regarding particular providence? What could change your position regarding particular providence? Do you rule out in advance particular providence as it is presented in the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) (which is not sporadic intervention) ?
Answer
First, I am different. If I were shown statistical evidence for providence, I would acknowledge it. For example, if there were a study that showed unequivocally better recovery for those for whom people pray.
Second, I am not making a claim in the name of science. Even if my claim is not scientific, it seems logical to me, and as such I accept it. Belief in God is also a thesis that cannot be disproved, and I accept that too. By contrast, Hume’s argument comes to persuade religious people that they are mistaken by using statistical tools, and in my opinion that has no persuasive force at all.