The primary preoccupation of Philosophy of Religion has been with attempts to establish the existence of God by rational means. Consequently, the writer's previous posts have focused primarily upon this topic. However another area of concern has been that of the validity of the miraculous which is also used as an evidence of God's existence.
David Hume, however, launched one of the most renowned challenges to the validity of the miraculous, in his "An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding” (1748), section X. On the one hand Hume grants that "eyewitness accounts" of events are "useful and necessary" to human life. However, he also contends that the usefulness of such testimony is inversely related to the uniqueness or unusualness of the event to which the eyewitness is attesting. (See Western Philosophy: An Anthology, ed., John Cottingham, (London: Blackwell Publishing, 2008), 370. Hume further determines that the validity of the eyewitness account is dependent upon the credibility of the individual providing the account and, in regards to the miraculous, he concludes that although there is always the possibility that a miracle has occurred such an occurrence is highly unlikely. (Nigel Warburton, Philosophy: The Basics, 28)
Regarding eyewitness credibility, Hume argued the eyewitnesses to the miraculous could only be regarded as legitimate by meeting the following criteria:
1. Numerous
2. Intelligent
3. Highly educated
4. Of unquestioned integrity
5. Willing to undergo severe loss if proven to be mistaken
6. Presenting claims publicly
In short, Hume argued that the criteria for establishing the occurrence of a miracle should center on likelihood that the "falsehood of the testimony would be more miraculous than the fact of the occurrence of the miracle which it endeavors to establish". (Woodfin, With All Your Mind, 71) For Hume, "most so-called miracles are based on deception or limited knowledge." (Newport, Ultimate Questions, 50) His criteria for miracles and the unlikelihood of their actual occurrence are firmly rooted in the scientific worldview and also represent the metaphysical perspective of deism. (Newport, Ultimate Questions, 50)
Hume's conclusions regarding the unlikely occurrence of the miraculous are based upon the following arguments:
1) Miracles are always improbable. Hume argued that there is always more evidence that a miracle has not occurred than there is that a miracle has occurred. Consequently, the wise person will be reluctant to believe the report of a miracle’s occurrence. Always leaving the door open, so to speak, Hume concludes that while a miracle is possible, the occurrence of a miracle is highly improbable. Applying the argument to the concept of Resurrection, Hume concludes that while the occurrence of a Resurrection is always possible, it is also improbable.
2) Psychological factors can lead individuals to be misled or even be fraudulent in their report of a miracle’s occurrence. Hume points out that there is something within the individual which desires to be a part of the "miraculous" since being part of such an event sets us apart. In addition we have a strong inclination to believe the improbable. The dispositions incline us toward belief in the miraculous in Hume's opinion.
3) Religions cancel out one another. Hume indicates that all of the world's religions believe in miracles. The existence of "gods" would be confirmed by the occurrence of the miraculous. The occurrence of the miraculous in each of the religions would, according to Hume, prove the existence of the different "gods" of each religion. The ultimate result is that these religions cancel one another out.
Hume presents a threefold argument:
The widely held view of miracles as violations of a law of nature is incoherent, that the evidence for even the most likely miracle will always be counterbalanced by the evidence establishing the law of nature that the miracle allegedly violates, and that the evidence supporting any given miracles is necessarily suspect. (Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, 2nd Edition, Robert Audi, ed., 402)
In short, the occurrence of the miraculous, according to Hume, is possible but highly improbable and therefore should never be used as a proof of God's existence due to the unlikelihood of their occurrence.
