David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of the History of Ideas 56 (4):531 - 553 (1995)
Newton, along with a number of other seventeenth-century scientists, is frequently charged with having held an inconsistent view of nature and its operations, believing on the one hand in immutable laws of nature, and on the other in divine interventions into the natural order. In this paper I argue that Newton, William Whiston, and Samuel Clarke, came to understand miracles, not as violations of laws of nature, but rather as beneficent coincidences which were remarkable either because they were unusual, or were beyond current understandings of nature. In this manner the Newtonians managed to reconcile their scientific pursuits with their religious convictions
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Andrew Chignell (2014). Can Kantian Laws Be Broken? Res Philosophica 91 (1):103-121.
Nancy Cartwright (forthcoming). Contingency and the Order of Nature. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences.
Joshua Ehrlich (2013). William Robertson and Scientific Theism. Modern Intellectual History 10 (3):519-542.
Similar books and articles
James E. Gilman (1989). Reconceiving Miracles. Religious Studies 25 (4):477 - 487.
Stephen Mumford (2001). Miracles: Metaphysics and Modality. Religious Studies 37 (2):191-202.
Robert A. Larmer (1985). Miracles and the Laws of Nature. Dialogue 24 (2):227 - 235.
T. J. Mawson (2001). Miracles and Laws of Nature. Religious Studies 37 (1):33-58.
Andrzej Stępnik (2007). Prawa natury, prawa nauki a cuda. Krytyka argumentów Hume'a przeciwko cudom. Filozofia Nauki 4.
Neil Whyte MacGill (1992). Miracles and Conservation Laws. Sophia 31 (1-2):79-87.
Robert Larmer (1988). Against 'Against Miracles'. Sophia 27 (1):20 - 25.
Keith Ward (2002). Believing in Miracles. Zygon 37 (3):741-750.
Timothy Pritchard (2011). Miracles and Violations. Religious Studies 47 (1):41-58.
George I. Mavrodes (1985). Miracles and the Laws of Nature. Faith and Philosophy 2 (4):333-346.
Jyrki Kivelä (2006). Kierkegaard's Tangential Interest in Miracles. The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 8:115-119.
Martin Curd (1996). Miracles as Violations of Laws of Nature. In Faith, Freedom, and Rationality: Philosophy of Religion Today. Rowman & Littlefield
Karen R. Zwier (2012). The Status of Laws of Nature in the Philosophy of Leibniz. Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 85:149-160.
Added to index2012-06-16
Total downloads14 ( #268,118 of 1,934,735 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #196,347 of 1,934,735 )
How can I increase my downloads?