Religious Studies 37 (2):191-202 (2001)
|Abstract||It is argued that miracles are best understood as natural events with supernatural causes and that such causal interaction is logically possible. Such miracles may, or may not, involve violations of natural laws. If violations of laws are possible, Humean supervenience views of laws are best avoided. Where miracles violate laws, it shows that what is naturally impossible may be actual and what is naturally necessary may not be actual. Whether or not miracles actually occur, this demonstrates that the nomic modalities differ from the logical. The theory contrasts favourably with competitors and allows, contrary to an interpretation of Aquinas, that Creation would have been a miracle.|
|Keywords||miracles laws of nature modality|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Chris Slupik (1995). A New Interpretation of Hume's 'Of Miracles'. Religious Studies 31 (4):517 - 536.
Timothy Pritchard (2011). Miracles and Violations. Religious Studies 47 (1):41-58.
Morgan Luck (2009). Aquinas's Miracles and the Luciferous Defence: The Problem of the Evil/Miracle Ratio. Sophia 48 (2):167-177.
George I. Mavrodes (1985). Miracles and the Laws of Nature. Faith and Philosophy 2 (4):333-346.
By John Whipple (2008). Hobbes on Miracles. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 89 (1):117–142.
Michael Almeida (2007). Martin on Miracles. Philo 10 (1):27-34.
Richard Otte (1996). Mackie's Treatment of Miracles. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 39 (3):151 - 158.
Steve Clarke (2003). Response to Mumford and Another Definition of Miracles. Religious Studies 39 (4):459-463.
T. J. Mawson (2001). Miracles and Laws of Nature. Religious Studies 37 (1):33-58.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads43 ( #26,104 of 548,984 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,320 of 548,984 )
How can I increase my downloads?