How does Gibbon's assault on the evidence of miracles differ from Hume's?
Cite some text to support your claims.
Deadline: Monday (10/5), start of class.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
George Stubbs, 1795
Welcome to the course blog for English 206/CWL 257: Enlightenment Literature and Culture. This is where you will find course documents, background information on the reading, and an opportunity to discuss the course material outside of class.
The Haymakers
George Stubbs, 1795
Final Exam
Past Readings
ECCO Assignment
Second Assignment
Course Information
First Assignment
Leading Discussion
Absalom and Achitophel
Contributors
- Alonzo Rico
- Andrew Rockway
- Beau
- Brian Radzevich
- Cameron.
- Cara Leo
- Craig
- Don Tucker
- Eddie
- Eduardo Patino Jr.
- Eric Johansen
- Esquire S.
- Frank Calace
- Geoffrey Magon
- Ian Cottle
- Jill T
- Julia
- KW
- Katie Hess
- Lauren Whalley
- LaurenBurke
- Michael Kim
- Ryan Johnson
- Stephen Black
- TKim
- Taylor Pinion
- Tim Anderson
- Tom Kluza
- Whitney
- Will Xiao
- Xiu Ling
- eoneal
Posts
Blog Archive
-
▼
2009
(129)
-
▼
October
(33)
- For Credit: The Working-Class Poet
- Just to Set the Record Straight...
- For Credit: A Most Excellent Moral
- For Credit: Hussies, Sluts, and Impudent Jades
- The Beggar's Opera Discussion
- For Credit: Newgate Philosophers
- For Credit: Questions, Confusion, Bafflement?
- Scenes from the Beggar's Opera
- For Credit: Writing Process
- REMINDER: Beggar's Opera Next Week
- For Credit: Polly Peachum
- For Credit: The Beggar and the Player
- For Credit: Democracy Better for Enlightenment? (D...
- Upcoming Assignments
- For Credit: A Distinctly Conservative Document?
- For Credit: Public or Private Use of Reason?
- For Credit: "Their Father's God and Property..."
- For Credit: John Locke
- NOT for credit: the story lives on...
- For Credit: Another Outlier? (last chance to post...
- Abelard to Eloisa Discussion
- For Credit: Questions Posed by Your Classmates
- For Credit: More Words to Describe Eloisa
- For Credit: How to Read this Poem?
- For Credit: There's Something about Abelard
- For Credit: In the Cloister
- For Credit: Holes in the Midterm? (Deadline Extended)
- For Credit: Amazing Grace
- For Credit: Suggest a Midterm Question!
- For Credit: Jefferson's Faith (DEADLINE EXTENDED)
- Gibbons Discussion Question
- Discussion Question on Gibbon
- For Credit: Gibbon on Miracles
-
▼
October
(33)
3 comments:
Gibbon, unlike Hume, actually emphasizes that miracles could possibly exist. But he mentions them in a very tongue in cheek manner, indicating that if they do exist, they are the only beneficial claims that Christians have in the faith. He states, "It is this deep impression of supernatural truths which has been so much celebrated under the name of faith; a state of mind described as the surest pledge of the divine favor and of future felicity, and recommended as the first or perhaps the only merit of a Christian." He doesn't deny the existence of miracles, but says that miracles are really the only credible defining proof that Christians might have that there is a God. He continues to destroy the existence of Christian morality, like Hume, and states that the Church Fathers don't credit knowledge at all.
Gibbon cleverly attacks the evidence of miracles indirectly. Instead of assaulting the belief of superstition and miracles head-on like Hume he discredits the church and its old traditions by referring to them as "primitive". Furthermore, Gibbon's tone towards ancient religion seems to be crude, but as he writes about how much church has evolved his tone seems to ease a bit. For example, "Their love of the marvelous and supernatural, their curiosity with regard to future events, and their strong propensity to extend their hopes and fears beyond the limits of the visible world, were the principal causes which favored the establishment of Polytheism" (154). Gibbon's feelings toward ancient traditions seem to be more conflicting when compared to modern religion. However, even though Gibbon attacks the church and its beliefs he prefers the idea of one God instead of numerous Gods who are capable of supernatural mischief. Also, Gibbon seems to belief that religion is evolving away from supernatural traditions into a more rational state of being. Perhaps he hopes that religion will eventually be watered down to its logic.
I agree with Alonzo, Gibbon like Hume, attacks the church as well. He tends to not want to acknowledge miracles as miracles nor does he acknowledge the people who seem to believe in things like that. He doesn't see why people would believe and put their faith in unseen prophecies. "The primitive Christians perpetually trod on mystic ground, and their minds were exercised by the habits of believing the most extraordinary events. They felt, or fancied, that on every side they were incessantly assaulted by demons, comforted by visions, instructed by prophecy, and surprisingly delivered from danger, sickness, and from death itself, by supplications from the church" (p 152). Gibbons thinks that the followers of the church are mindless followers un-capable of making any type of rational decisions. The people that believed in the supernatural or witnessed them maybe at some point do not exist anymore and the people need to change their beliefs to fit the modern times.
Post a Comment