Religious Studies 44 (2):149-159 (2008)
|Abstract||In his paper "Miracles: Metaphysics, Physics, and Physicalism," Kirk McDermid appears to have two primary goals. The first is to demonstrate that my account of how God might produce a miracle without violating any laws of nature is radically flawed. The second is to suggest two alternative accounts, one suitable for a deterministic world, one suitable for an indeterministic world, which allow for the occurrence of a miracle without violation of the laws of nature, yet do not suffer from the defects of what McDermid terms the ’Larmerian’ model. I briefly describe my model, reply to McDermid’s criticism of it, and evaluate his alternative accounts|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Toby Handfield (2001). Dispositional Essentialism and the Possibility of a Law-Abiding Miracle. Philosophical Quarterly 51 (205):484-494.
William E. Stempsey (2002). Miracles and the Limits of Medical Knowledge. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 5 (1):1 - 9.
Chris Slupik (1995). A New Interpretation of Hume's 'Of Miracles'. Religious Studies 31 (4):517 - 536.
Jyrki Kivelä (2006). Kierkegaard's Tangential Interest in Miracles. The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 8:115-119.
Richard Otte (1996). Mackie's Treatment of Miracles. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 39 (3):151 - 158.
Timothy Pritchard (2011). Miracles and Violations. Religious Studies 47 (1):41-58.
Stephen Mumford (2001). Miracles: Metaphysics and Modality. Religious Studies 37 (2):191-202.
T. J. Mawson (2001). Miracles and Laws of Nature. Religious Studies 37 (1):33-58.
George I. Mavrodes (1985). Miracles and the Laws of Nature. Faith and Philosophy 2 (4):333-346.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads34 ( #35,297 of 549,014 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,261 of 549,014 )
How can I increase my downloads?