C) Contrasting views on the possibility of miracles

Hume

• 'Enquiry concerning human understanding' was written to convince people the appeal of miracles could not demonstrate the truth of Christianity/religion
• He was an empiricist- believed questions of truth should be based on evidence (incl. testimony of witnesses)
• 3 things could convince Hume of a miracle:
• 1. Constant experience = full proof
• 2. Proportionality- chance of it happening vs. not happening
• 3. Violation of the laws of nature- testimony must be so strong that falseness would be more miraculous 
• Does not deny the possibility of miracles
• Highlighted 4 reasons against them:
• 1. Insufficient number of witnesses
• 2. People are so drawn to marvels/ wonders- generate a positive emotion so people support them
• 3. From 'ignorant' people (refers to peasants)
• 4. Religions contradict each other (e.g. Hinduism-multiple deities)
• Hume concluded "No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless... its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavours to establish"
• More rational to distrust the testimony about a miracle than to believe a law of nature…