The principles of causality and miracle in John Locke and David Hume

The concepts of causality and miracle have been the subject of discussion by both theologion and philosophers throughout history. Causality has been discussed by philosophers within the framework of whether there is a necessary connection between two events. Since the concept of miracle is also related to causality, it is among the subjects that philosophers have expressed their opinions. John Locke (1632-1704), one of the 17th century Enlightenment philosophers, came to the forefront especially on issues such as knowledge, politics, education and history. For this reason, his understanding of causality, the concept of miracle and his understanding of God have remained in the background. Nevertheless, in his understanding of causality, he managed to guide the thoughts of philosophers who came after him. Locke treats causality as "another property inherent in the object itself". David Hume (1711-1776), one of the most important figures of English empiricism after Locke, was influenced by his ideas and developed them. He agrees with him that causality is not a priori knowledge. When it comes to miracles, Locke thinks of them as things that occur contrary to the laws of nature. According to him, God sent revelation to his chosen messengers. In order to prove this revelation, he supported it with things that no one else could do, that is, miracles. Hume states that the only evidence of those who claim that miracles exist is testimony. He discussed how reliable the principle of testimony is.