How Does Hume Improve The Belief Of Miracles

In Section X of An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Hume disproves the belief of miracles, “violation of the laws of nature” (Hume 76), as rational justification to believe in religion, specifically Christianity, through the application of the scientific method: a process that uses empirical data to establish accurate cause and effect relationships that configure human judgement. He indicates the two kinds of human reasoning (‘judgement”) are “relations of ideas and matters of facts” (15), which serve to distinguish “probability” from “proof” (23).
Relations of ideas are revealed “by mere operation of thought” (15); knowledge acquired without experience, “a priori” (17). According to Hume, it is absurd to predict behavior of objects without having any exposure to it before (experience). The validity of this reasoning is tainted, because the mind makes up an effect that are not true, so the conception is irrational. The mind can never possibly find the effect in the supposed cause, by the most accurate scrutiny and examination. For the effect is totally different from the cause, and can never be discovered in it.

Since miracles are supposedly an occur that is supernatural, or beyond the powers of nature, it cannot be associated to its laws. Furthermore, fundamentals of miracles transcends into the laws of nature. For example, if many more people witnessed miracle, it would outweigh the laws of nature because the miracles would become a law of nature—testimony of all past experiences. This is counter evidence for Hume’s claim that more miracles would merit as evidence for the existence of the phenomena; it would no longer be an illusions or trick, it would be real and no longer a