In his dialogues concerning religion David Hume explores whether religious belief can be rational. Because Hume is an empiricist he thinks that a belief is rational only if it is sufficiently supported by experiential evidence. So the question is really, is there enough evidence in the world to allow us to infer an infinitely good, wise, powerful, perfect God? Hume does not ask whether we can rationally prove that God exists, but rather whether we …showed first 75 words of 832 total…

…showed last 75 words of 832 total…demonstrable. Second, even if the argument were legitimate it would not prove enough. All that the argument proves is that there is some necessarily existing being but we cannot infer that this being is God. The necessarily existing being could just as easily be the material universe. Hume has demonstrated that we can have no idea how and why this necessary existence works, thus to say that God exists represents a mere guess or speculation.