Hume's Argument Against The Existence Of Miracles

Hume’s argument against the existence of miracles is based on his belief of the empiricism. He wrote “experience be our only guidance in reasoning concerning matters of fact... but in some case is apt to lead us into errors”.(83) Hume means that errors didn’t exist in the experience itself, but when we are facing the uncertainty of empirical knowledge, we all need to follow one principle, “a Wise man, therefore, proportions his belief to the evidence”(84). By proportion, he means that faced with a belief, people may find different experiences. For example, some people say I have seen dinosaurs, some people say I have not seen dinosaurs. By comparing these experiences, the one we are more inclined to be the true conclusion. In his words “two opposite experience, of which the one destroys the other”(86).

Hume points out the main characteristic of miracle which is “a violation of the laws of nature”(86) Such as human can not resuscitate is a natural law, but if experience has proved that human can be revived, then it’s a miracle for Hume。Using Hume’s claim earlier “proportions believe to the evidence”, If most people's experience fails to show signs of miracles, so it can not exist.

Up to this part, I agree with Hume. However, when he goes on talking about his allegations against those who believe and tell the story about miracles, I could agree with him anymore. Hume thinks that the person who tells and listens to the miraculous story works for the other party, “their credulity increase his impotence, and his impudence overpowers their credulity”(88). As discussed earlier, Hume mentioned the relationship between eyewitness and historian. He needs two opposing competitions to get the conclusion. Yet I think the answer may not even exist on either side.
The belief in miracles is just not a wise man’s choice or they have their own purpose in

society?
I think that the existence of religion and the belief in miracles shows guidance in life for man people. Hume said,” the spirit of religion join itself to the love of wonder, there is the end of common sense". However, when I mention Hume’s belief to my friends, I realized each of them are using their very own and different beliefs try to make sense of his’s. My friends who are a psychology major was trying to explain human beliefs of future and miracles in terms of special parts of the brain. My religious study major friend tried to explain the social impact that has been brought by the religion and meaning of miracles. This is very inspirational for me, a atheism. Everyone has their own beliefs, a coward will believe a lot of things, but if a person has no belief, then does that make him wise or just crazy? I think Hume's allegations against those who believe in miracles are too subjective.