Before looking into and understanding Hume’s reasoning for rejecting miracles, it is best to have some general background of some of Hume’s philosophies. First of all, Hume tends to put his faith into probability over any other sources of reasoning. Therefore, Hume would say that something is “true” if it is probable, and is “false” if it is improbable. Hume’s faith in probability is addressed

Clearly, there are two sides to this argument as with any other argument. Personally, I would have to side with Hume to some extent; however, I must also disagree somewhat. When Hume states that miracles are the least probable thing to occur, I can readily agree with that. In order for something to be deemed a miracle, it would have to be extremely improbable. For Hume to come to the conclusion that miracles are the least probable thing to occur, he states that the laws of nature are always to hold true. This is where I start to find fault with Hume’s argument. In my opinion, Hume does not have enough proof to say that the laws of nature can never be broken. Hypothetically, if one day I had the power to hover above the ground, then I would obviously be breaking the laws of nature. How can Hume say for certain that I did not break the laws of nature. Hume cannot be everywhere at all times to make a 100% conclusion that laws of nature are never broken. Although I would agree with him that it is more probable that I am making it up, unless Hume watched over me that day then he can not say for certain that it did not happen. Hume’s reasoning is enough to establish reasonable doubt and improbability of miracles, yet he does not have enough proof to say with absolute certainty that miracles can not occur. Hume, due to his strong faith in probability, would answer me by saying that there is no point in believing in miracles because they will always be improbable. That doesn’t stand with me. It is similar to saying that I could never win the lottery because the probability of it happening are so low. All in all, I think Hume does an excellent job in supporting his beliefs on miracles. However, I think he would be more correct by leaving miracles as just improbable occurrences instead of declaring miracles as impossible.

in section VI; however, it also plays an important role in the debate in section VII concerning necessary connection. In section VII, Hume declares necessary connection to be unfavorable when compared to probability. In other words, probability is what allows humans to know what resulting action is about to occur. For example, when paper comes in contact with a flame, people already know for a fact that the paper is going to burn. This certainty does not result from feeling some power of causation

Some topics in this essay:
VII Hume, Personally Hume, It’s Hume’s, Understanding Throughout, Argument Miracles”, Smith Hume’s, Fogelin Hume’s, Hume’s Smith’s, Fogelin Hume, Hume Miracles, laws nature, conclusion miracles, faith probability, hume miracles, probable occur, attacks hume, hume’s reasoning, laws nature probability, worth believing, miracles improbable, nature broken, laws nature broken, laws nature hume, miracles probable occur,