"Of Miracles" by David Hume

[Pyrrho]

Most people reason more or less as Hume advises, most of the time.  In fact, pretty much everyone reasons as he does regarding miracles for other people's religions.  They don't, however, tend to apply the same level of skepticism to their own preferred beliefs.  Which is to say, they are prejudiced in favor of their favored religion, and do not treat it the same as they treat other stories of a like nature.  If they were reasonable, they would follow the same principles in all cases, and not make exceptions for their favored stories.


To give you an example of what I mean, suppose I were to tell all of you that every night, I fly around my bedroom, without the aid of any devices, as I find it relaxing before going to sleep.  Would any of you suppose that this miracle occurred?  Would you have any inclination at all to suppose that it is true?  Or would you immediately reject the claim as untrue?

You know, from your own experience, that many people say falsehoods.  But you probably don't know of anyone flying without the aid of any devices, nor does that probably fit with your ideas of what people can do.  So what would you believe if I claimed that I could fly without the aid of any devices?

Would any of you seriously believe that I can fly without the aid of any device?  Would any of you even be slightly tempted to believe it? Or would you all reject it as a ridiculous falsehood?


Suppose I got my wife to also tell you that I fly, and have a couple of neighbors testify that I do so as well.  Will that make any difference for you?  Will you believe the story if I can get some people to also claim it is true?



Bringing God into the question also changes nothing.  We can apply this to my example.  Suppose I were to tell you, it is not my power that allows for me to fly around my bedroom, but it is God's power that allows me to do so.  God, being omnipotent, can make me fly, if it pleases Him to do so.  Now, does that change your opinion of whether I fly each night or not?


Here is Hume on the issue of bringing God into the matter:

Though the Being to whom the miracle is ascribed, be, in this case, Almighty, it does not, upon that account, become a whit more probable; since it is impossible for us to know the attributes or actions of such a Being, otherwise than from the experience which we have of his productions, in the usual course of nature. This still reduces us to past observation, and obliges us to compare the instances of the violation of truth in the testimony of men, with those of the violation of the laws of nature by miracles, in order to judge which of them is most likely and probable. As the violations of truth are more common in the testimony concerning religious miracles, than in that concerning any other matter of fact; this must diminish very much the authority of the former testimony, and make us form a general resolution, never to lend any attention to it, with whatever specious pretence it may be covered.

http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/341#Hume_0222_261