Search results for 'Miracles' (try it on Scholar)

926 found
Sort by:
  1. Willem B. Drees, Philip Hefner, Rustum Roy, John A. Teske, H. Cyberpsychology & Terence L. Nichols Why Miracles (2002). William R. LaFleur. Zygon 37 (3-4):768.score: 30.0
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Richard Swinbume Miracles (1989). The Volume is Suitable for a Single Semester Course in the Philosophy of reIigion and Should Find Rather Widespread Use. Teaching Philosophy 12 (3):335.score: 30.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Thomas Rockwell, William R. LaFleur, Willem B. Drees, Philip Hefner, Rustum Roy, John A. Teske, Human Relationships Cyberpsychology & Terence L. Nichols Why Miracles (2002). John F. Haught in Search of a God for Evolution: Paul Tillich and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin Edward L. Schoen Clocks, God, and Scientific Realism Michael Ruse Robert Boyle and the Machine Metaphor Human Meaning in a Technological Culture. Zygon 37 (3-4):768.score: 30.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. John Earman (2000). Hume's Abject Failure: The Argument Against Miracles. Oxford University Press.score: 24.0
    This vital study offers a new interpretation of Hume's famous "Of Miracles," which notoriously argues against the possibility of miracles. By situating Hume's popular argument in the context of the 18th century debate on miracles, Earman shows Hume's argument to be largely unoriginal and chiefly without merit where it is original. Yet Earman constructively conceives how progress can be made on the issues that Hume's essay so provocatively posed about the ability of eyewitness testimony to establish the (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Timothy Pritchard (2011). Miracles and Violations. Religious Studies 47 (1):41-58.score: 24.0
    The claim that a miracle is a violation of a law of nature has sometimes been used as part of an a priori argument against the possibility of miracle, on the grounds that a violation is conceptually impossible. I criticize these accounts but also suggest that alternative accounts, when phrased in terms of laws of nature, fail to provide adequate conceptual space for miracles. It is not clear what a ‘violation’ of a law of nature might be, but this (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Stephen Mumford (2001). Miracles: Metaphysics and Modality. Religious Studies 37 (2):191-202.score: 24.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Jacob Busch (2008). No New Miracles, Same Old Tricks. Theoria 74 (2):102-114.score: 24.0
    Abstract: Laudan (1984) distinguishes between two senses of success for scientific theories: (i) that a particular theory is successful, and (ii) that the methods for picking out approximately true theories are successful. These two senses of success are reflected in two different ways that the no miracles argument for scientific realism (NMA) may be set out. First, I set out a (traditional) version of NMA that considers the success of particular theories. I then consider a more recent formulation of (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Mark Newman (2010). The No-Miracles Argument, Reliabilism, and a Methodological Version of the Generality Problem. Synthese 177 (1):111 - 138.score: 24.0
    The No-Miracles Argument (NMA) is often used to support scientific realism. We can formulate this argument as an inference to the best explanation this accusation of circularity by appealing to reliabilism, an externalist epistemology. In this paper I argue that this retreat fails. Reliabilism suffers from a potentially devastating difficulty known as the Generality Problem and attempts to solve this problem require adopting both epistemic and metaphysical assumptions regarding local scientific theories. Although the externalist can happily adopt the former, (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Dean Rickles (2013). Mirror Symmetry and Other Miracles in Superstring Theory. Foundations of Physics 43 (1):54-80.score: 24.0
    The dominance of string theory in the research landscape of quantum gravity physics (despite any direct experimental evidence) can, I think, be justified in a variety of ways. Here I focus on an argument from mathematical fertility, broadly similar to Hilary Putnam’s ‘no miracles argument’ that, I argue, many string theorists in fact espouse in some form or other. String theory has generated many surprising, useful, and well-confirmed mathematical ‘predictions’—here I focus on mirror symmetry and the mirror theorem. These (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Morgan Luck (2009). Aquinas's Miracles and the Luciferous Defence: The Problem of the Evil/Miracle Ratio. Sophia 48 (2):167-177.score: 24.0
    Miracles and the problem of evil are two prominent areas of research within philosophy of religion. On occasion these areas converge, with God’s goodness being brought into question by the claim that either there is a lack of miracles, or there are immoral miracles. In this paper I shall highlight a second manner in which miracles and the problem of evil relate. Namely, I shall give reason as to why what is considered to be miraculous may (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Greg Frost-Arnold (2010). The No-Miracles Argument for Realism: Inference to an Unacceptable Explanation. Philosophy of Science 77 (1):35-58.score: 24.0
    I argue that a certain type of naturalist should not accept a prominent version of the no-miracles argument (NMA). First, scientists (usually) do not accept explanations whose explanans-statements neither generate novel predictions nor unify apparently disparate established claims. Second, scientific realism (as it appears in the NMA) is an explanans that makes no new predictions and fails to unify disparate established claims. Third, many proponents of the NMA explicitly adopt a naturalism that forbids philosophy of science from using any (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Yiftach J. H. Fehige (2012). Miracles and Science: Mora Than a Miraculous Relationship. Toronto Journal of Theology 28 (1):159-163.score: 24.0
    A solicited response to Robert Larmer's defence of the supernaturalist model of miracles. I show why Larmer fails to make his claim plausible that there aren't any good theological reasons to turn away from the supernaturalist model of miracles.
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Joshua D. Reichard (2013). Of Miracles and Metaphysics: A Pentecostal‐Charismatic and Process‐Relational Dialogue. Zygon 48 (2):274-293.score: 24.0
    This article is comprised of a dialogue between Pentecostal-Charismatic and Process-Relational theologies on the perennial issue of miracles. The language of supernaturalism, widely employed by Pentecostal-Charismatic theologians, is contrasted with the metaphysical naturalism of Process-Relational theology; it is proposed that a philosophically and scientifically sensitive theology of miracles is possible through a synthesis of both traditions. Themes such as nonmaterialism over materialism, spiritual experience, and prayer for healing miracles are explored. A theology of miracles, mutually informed (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Steven Horst (2014). Miracles and Two Accounts of Scientific Laws. Zygon 49 (2):323-347.score: 24.0
    Since early modernity, it has often been assumed that miracles are incompatible with the existence of the natural laws utilized in the sciences. This paper argues that this assumption is largely an artifact of empiricist accounts of laws that should be rejected for reasons internal to philosophy of science, and that no such incompatibility arises on the most important alternative interpretations, which treat laws as expressions of forces, dispositions, or causal powers.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Stanley Tweyman (ed.) (1996). Hume on Miracles. Thoemmes.score: 24.0
    This is the first volume of a two-volume set containing the most important secondary literature on Hume on Religion (Volume 2, to be published in August 1996, deals with general remarks on Hume and Natural Religion). Focusing on responses to the Essay on Miracles , the material included in this volume ranges from 1751 to 1883. Authors include: T. Rutherford, William Adams, John Leland, George Campbell, Revd. S. Vince, John Hollis, Revd. James Somerville, Dr. Wately, Revd. A. C. L. (...)
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Daniel Howard-Snyder (2003). On Hume's Philosophical Case Against Miracles. In Christopher Bernard (ed.), God Matters: Readings in the Philosophy of Religion. Longman Publications.score: 22.0
    According to the Christian religion, Jesus was “crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again”. I take it that this rising again—the Resurrection of Jesus, as it’s sometimes called—is, according to the Christian religion, an historical event, just like his crucifixion, death, and burial. And I would have thought that to investigate whether the Resurrection occurred, we would need to do some historical research: we would need to assess the reliability of (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Dylan Dodd (2011). Quasi-Miracles, Typicality, and Counterfactuals. Synthese 179 (3):351 - 360.score: 21.0
    If one flips an unbiased coin a million times, there are 2 1,000,000 series of possible heads/tails sequences, any one of which might be the sequence that obtains, and each of which is equally likely to obtain. So it seems (1) 'If I had tossed a fair coin one million times, it might have landed heads every time' is true. But as several authors have pointed out, (2) 'If I had tossed a fair coin a million times, it wouldn't have (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. David Johnson (1999). Hume, Holism, and Miracles. Cornell University Press.score: 21.0
    David Johnson seeks to overthrow one of the widely accepted tenets of Anglo-American philosophy -- that of the success of the Humean case against the rational ...
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Yann Schmitt (2012). Hume on Miracles: The Issue of Question--Begging. Forum Philosophicum: International Journal for Philosophy 17 (1):49-71.score: 21.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Simon Fitzpatrick (2013). Doing Away with the No Miracles Argument. In Dennis Dieks & Vassilios Karakostas (eds.), Recent Progress in Philosophy of Science: Perspectives and Foundational Problems. Springer.score: 20.0
    The recent debate surrounding scientific realism has largely focused on the “no miracles” argument (NMA). Indeed, it seems that most contemporary realists and anti-realists have tied the case for realism to the adequacy of this argument. I argue that it is mistake for realists to let the debate be framed in this way. Realists would be well advised to abandon the NMA altogether and pursue an alternative strategy, which I call the “local strategy”.
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Morgan Luck (2007). Supernatural Miracles and Religious Inclusiveness. Sophia 46 (3):287 - 293.score: 20.0
    In this paper I shall assess Clarke’s assertion that all definitions of miracles that purport to satisfy the criterion of religious inclusiveness should substitute the term ‘supernatural’ for ‘non-natural’. In addition, I shall attempt to strengthen Clarke’s conception of the supernatural by offering an analysis of what it means for something to be ‘above’ nature. Lastly, I shall offer a new argument as to why Clarke’s intention-based definition of miracles is necessarily less religiously inclusive than Mumford’s causation-based definition.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. William E. Stempsey (2002). Miracles and the Limits of Medical Knowledge. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 5 (1):1 - 9.score: 20.0
    In considering whether medical miracles occur, the limits of epistemology bring us to confront our metaphysical worldview of medicine and nature in general. This raises epistemological questions of a higher order. David Hume’s understanding of miracles as violations of the laws of nature assumes that nature is completely regular, whereas doctrines such as C. S. Peirce’s "tychism" hold that there is an element of absolute chance in the workings of the universe. Process philosophy gives yet another view of (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Matthew C. Bagger (1997). Hume and Miracles. Journal of the History of Philosophy 35 (2):237 - 251.score: 18.0
    "Hume and Miracles" relates Hume’s essay "Of Miracles" to the Port-Royal ’Logic’ and John Locke. It argues that Hume did not, as is often supposed, intend to suggest that well-attested miracle reports defeat themselves by undermining the laws of nature they defy. Instead, Hume argues that the specifically ’religious’ nature of the testimony relating to miracle claims rules out their acceptance because of the frequency of fraud in religious matters. Hume’s views are too austere because one might wish (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. John Worrall, Miracles, Pessimism and Scientific Realism.score: 18.0
    Worrall ([1989]) argued that structural realism provides a ‘synthesis’ of the main pro-realist argument – the ‘No Miracles Argument’, and the main anti-realist argument – the ‘Pessimistic Induction’. More recently, however, it has been claimed (Howson [2000] and Lewis [2001], respectively) that each of these arguments is an instance of the same probabilistic fallacy – sometimes called the ‘base-rate fallacy’. If correct, this clearly seems to undermine structural realism and Magnus and Callender have indeed claimed that both arguments are (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Greg Frost-Arnold, The Limits of Scientific Explanation and the No-Miracles Argument.score: 18.0
    There are certain explanations that scientists do not accept, even though such explanations do not conflict with observation, logic, or other scientific theories. I argue that a common version of the no-miracles argument (NMA) for scientific realism relies upon just such an explanation. First, scientists (usually) do not accept explanations whose explanans neither generates novel predictions nor unifies apparently disparate phenomena. Second, scientific realism (as it appears in the NMA) is an explanans that makes no new predictions, and fails (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. T. J. Mawson (2001). Miracles and Laws of Nature. Religious Studies 37 (1):33-58.score: 18.0
    In this paper, I argue that miracles should not be defined as involving violations of natural laws. They should be defined as signs of particular volitions of the deity or of other supernatural agents. I suggest that one may, without any prior belief in the existence of such supernatural agents, reasonably come to believe that one has witnessed miracles.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Peter Millican, Hume, Miracles, and Probabilities: Meeting Earman's Challenge.score: 18.0
    The centrepiece of Earman’s provocatively titled book Hume’s Abject Failure: The Argument against Miracles (OUP, 2000) is a probabilistic interpretation of Hume’s famous ‘maxim’ concerning the credibility of miracle reports, followed by a trenchant critique of the maxim when thus interpreted. He argues that the first part of this maxim, once its obscurity is removed, is simply trivial, while the second part is nonsensical. His subsequent discussion culminates with a forthright challenge to any would-be defender of Hume to (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Rodney D. Holder (1998). Hume on Miracles: Bayesian Interpretation, Multiple Testimony, and the Existence of God. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49 (1):49-65.score: 18.0
    Hume's argument concerning miracles is interpreted by making approximations to terms in Bayes's theorem. This formulation is then used to analyse the impact of multiple testimony. Individual testimonies which are ‘non-miraculous’ in Hume's sense can in principle be accumulated to yield a high probability both for the occurrence of a single <span class='Hi'>miracle</span> and for the occurrence of at least one of a set of miracles. Conditions are given under which testimony for miracles may provide support for (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Robert A. Larmer (2008). Miracles, Physicalism, and the Laws of Nature. Religious Studies 44 (2):149-159.score: 18.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. James E. Taylor (2007). Hume on Miracles: Interpretation and Criticism. Philosophy Compass 2 (4):611–624.score: 18.0
    Philosophers continue to debate about David Hume’s case against the rationality of belief in miracles. This article clarifies semantic, epistemological, and metaphysical questions addressed in the controversy. It also explains the main premises of Hume’s argument and discusses criticisms of them. The article concludes that one’s evaluation of Hume’s argument will depend on one’s views about (a) the definitions of ’miracle’ and ’natural law’; (b) the type of reasoning one ought to employ to determine the probability that a particular (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Greg Frost‐Arnold (2010). The No‐Miracles Argument for Realism: Inference to an Unacceptable Explanation. Philosophy of Science 77 (1):35-58.score: 18.0
    I argue that a certain type of naturalist should not accept a prominent version of the no‐miracles argument (NMA). First, scientists (usually) do not accept explanations whose explanans‐statements neither generate novel predictions nor unify apparently disparate established claims. Second, scientific realism (as it appears in the NMA) is an explanans that makes no new predictions and fails to unify disparate established claims. Third, many proponents of the NMA explicitly adopt a naturalism that forbids philosophy of science from using any (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. George I. Mavrodes (1998). David Hume and the Probability of Miracles. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 43 (3):167-182.score: 18.0
    I examine Hume’s proposal about rationally considering testimonial evidence for miracles. He proposes that we compare the probability of the miracle (independently of the testimony) with the probability that the testimony is false, rejecting whichever has the lower probability. However, this superficially plausible proposal is massively ignored in our treatment of testimonial evidence in nonreligious contexts. I argue that it should be ignored, because in many cases, including the resurrection of Jesus, neither we nor Hume have any experience which (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. E. J. Lowe (1987). Miracles and Laws of Nature. Religious Studies 23 (2):263-78.score: 18.0
    Construing miracles as \textquotedblleft{}violations,\textquotedblright I argue that a law of nature must specify some kind of possibility. But we must have here a sense of possibility for which the ancient rule of logic---ab esse ad posse valet consequentia---does not hold. We already have one example associated with the concept of statute law, a law which specifies what is legally possible but which is not destroyed by a violation. If laws of nature are construed as specifying some analogous sense of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Christine Overall (1985). Miracles as Evidence Against the Existence of God. Southern Journal of Philosophy 23 (3):347-353.score: 18.0
    AN ASSUMPTION IN DEBATES ABOUT THE PHILOSOPHICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF MIRACLES IS THAT IF A MIRACLE (A VIOLATION OF NATURAL LAW OR A PERMANENTLY INEXPLICABLE EVENT) WERE TO OCCUR, IT WOULD BE EVIDENCE FOR THE EXISTENCE OF THE CHRISTIAN GOD. THE PAPER EXPLORES RESERVATIONS BY SEVERAL PHILOSOPHERS ABOUT THIS CONNECTION BETWEEN GOD AND MIRACLES, AND PRESENTS ARGUMENTS TO SHOW THAT IF A MIRACLE WERE TO OCCUR THERE WOULD BE GOOD REASON TO DENY THAT GOD EXISTS.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Alan Hájek (2008). Are Miracles Chimerical? In , Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion, Volume 1. Oxford Univ Pr. 82-104.score: 18.0
    I analyze David Hume’s "Of Miracles". I vindicate Hume’s argument against two charges: that it (1) defines miracles out of existence; (2) appeals to a suspect principle of balancing probabilities. He argues that miracles are, in a certain sense, maximally improbable. To understand this sense, we must turn to his notion of probability as ’strength of analogy’: miracles are incredible, according to him, because they bear no analogy to anything in our past experience. This reveals as (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. George I. Mavrodes (1985). Miracles and the Laws of Nature. Faith and Philosophy 2 (4):333-346.score: 18.0
    Construing miracles as “violations,” I argue that a law of nature must specify some kind of possibility. But we must have here a sense of possibility for which the ancient rule of logic---ab esse ad posse valet consequentia---does not hold. We already have one example associated with the concept of statute law, a law which specifies what is legally possible but which is not destroyed by a violation. If laws of nature are construed as specifying some analogous sense of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Robert Hambourger (1980). Belief in Miracles and Hume's Essay. Noûs 14 (4):587-604.score: 18.0
    IN HIS ESSAY "OF MIRACLES" HUME DERIVES THE CONCLUSION THAT TESTIMONY CANNOT PROVIDE ADEQUATE REASON TO BELIEVE IN A MIRACLE FROM TWO PRINCIPLES; A GENERAL ONE CONCERNING THE CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH TESTIMONY SHOULD BE ACCEPTED, AND THE PRINCIPLES THAT TO BE BELIEVED PROPERLY TO BE A MIRACLE, AN EVENT WOULD HAVE TO VIOLATE PRINCIPLES AS WELL ESTABLISHED AS ANY CAN BE BY INFERENCES FROM EXPERIENCE. HERE IT IS ARGUED THAT BOTH OF HUME’S PRINCIPLES ARE FALSE, AFTER WHICH A POSITIVE (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. J. Gill (2001). Hume, Holism, and Miracles. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 79 (3):439 – 440.score: 18.0
    Book Information Hume, Holism, and Miracles. By David Johnson. Cornell University Press. Ithaca. 1999. Pp. xi + 106. Hardback, £22.95.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Luke Glynn (2013). Of Miracles and Interventions. Erkenntnis 78 (1):43-64.score: 18.0
    In Making Things Happen, James Woodward influentially combines a causal modeling analysis of actual causation with an interventionist semantics for the counterfactuals encoded in causal models. This leads to circularities, since interventions are defined in terms of both actual causation and interventionist counterfactuals. Circularity can be avoided by instead combining a causal modeling analysis with a semantics along the lines of that given by David Lewis, on which counterfactuals are to be evaluated with respect to worlds in which their antecedents (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Michael Root (1989). Miracles and the Uniformity of Nature. American Philosophical Quarterly 26 (4):333 - 342.score: 18.0
    IN SECTION X OF "AN INQUIRY CONCERNING HUMAN UNDERSTANDING", DAVID HUME RAISES TWO QUESTIONS ABOUT MIRACLES AND THEIR RELATION TO TESTIMONY. FIRST, HE ASKS WHETHER IT COULD EVER BE REASONABLE TO BELIEVE ON THE BASIS OF TESTIMONY THAT NATURE DOES NOT FIT THE IMAGE OF OUR SCIENCE, AND, SECOND, HE ASKS WHETHER IT COULD EVER BE REASONABLE TO BELIEVE ON THE BASIS OF TESTIMONY THAT NATURE IS NOT UNIFORM. HUME’S ANSWER TO THE FIRST QUESTION IS ’YES’ AND HIS ANSWER (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Richard Otte (2004). Review of Fogelin, A Defense of Hume on Miracles. [REVIEW] Hume Studies 30 (1):165-68.score: 18.0
    With A Defense of Hume on Miracles Robert Fogelin enters the recent discussion on Hume’s treatment of miracles. In this short book Fogelin begins by presenting his interpretation of Hume’s argument concerning miracles. The second chapter is a lengthy treatment of recent work by David Johnson and John Earman, and the third short chapter is a discussion of the relation of Hume’s view on miracles to his broader philosophy. There are also two appendices and the text (...)
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Christine Overall (2006). Miracles, Evidence, Evil, and God: A Twenty-Year Debate. Dialogue 45 (2):355-366.score: 18.0
    This paper is the latest in a debate with Robert Larmer as to whether the occurrence of a miracle would provide evidence for the existence of God or against the existence of God. Whereas Larmer’s view is categorical (miracles occur and are evidence for the existence of God), mine is hypothetical (if the events typically described as miracles were to occur -- although I do not believe they do -- they would be evidence against the existence of God). (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Kenneth L. Pearce, A Leibnizian Theory of Miracles.score: 18.0
    Most accounts of miracles assume that a necessary condition for an event's being miraculous is that it be, as Hume put it, “a violation of the laws of nature.” However, any account of this sort will be ill-suited for defending the major Western religious traditions because, as I will argue, classical theists should not believe in violations of the laws of nature. In place of the rejected Humean accounts, this paper seeks to develop and defend a Leibnizian conception of (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Carl Matheson (1998). Why the No-Miracles Argument Fails. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 12 (3):263 – 279.score: 18.0
    The chief argument for scientific realism is the no-miracles argument, according to which the approximate truth of our current scientific theories can be inferred from their success through time. To date, anti-realist responses to the argument have been unconvincing, largely because of their anti-realistic presuppositions. In this paper, it is shown that realists cannot pre-emptively dismiss the problem of the underdetermination of theory by evidence, and that the no-miracles argument fails because it does nothing to dispel the threat (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Robert A. Larmer (2009). Interpreting Hume on Miracles. Religious Studies 45 (3):325-338.score: 18.0
    Contemporary commentators on Hume’s essay, "Of Miracles" have increasingly tended to argue that Hume never intended to suggest that testimonial evidence must always be insufficient to justify belief in a miracle. This is in marked contrast to earlier commentators who interpreted Hume as intending to demonstrate that testimonial evidence is incapable in principle of ever establishing rational belief in a miracle. In this article I argue that this traditional interpretation is the correct one.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Jordan Howard Sobel (1987). On the Evidence of Testimony for Miracles: A Bayesian Interpretation of David Hume's Analysis. Philosophical Quarterly 37 (147):166-186.score: 18.0
    A BAYESIAN ARTICULATION OF HUME’S VIEWS IS OFFERED BASED ON A FORM OF THE BAYES-LAPLACE THEOREM THAT IS SUPERFICIALLY LIKE A FORMULA OF CONDORCET’S. INFINITESIMAL PROBABILITIES ARE EMPLOYED FOR MIRACLES AGAINST WHICH THERE ARE ’PROOFS’ THAT ARE NOT OPPOSED BY ’PROOFS’. OBJECTIONS MADE BY RICHARD PRICE ARE DEALT WITH, AND RECENT EXPERIMENTS CONDUCTED BY AMOS TVERSKY AND DANIEL KAHNEMAN ARE CONSIDERED IN WHICH PERSONS TEND TO DISCOUNT PRIOR IMPROBABILITIES WHEN ASSESSING REPORTS OF WITNESSES.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Richard Otte (1996). Mackie's Treatment of Miracles. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 39 (3):151 - 158.score: 18.0
    A recent discussion of Hume’s argument concerning the rationality of accepting a belief that a miracle has occurred is given by J. L. Mackie in The Miracle of Theism. Mackie believes that Hume’s argument is essentially correct, although he attempts to clarify and strengthen it. Any version of Hume’s argument depends upon one’s conception of miracles and laws of nature; I will argue that Mackie commits a simple logical error and that given his conception of laws of (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Morgan Luck (2005). Against the Possibility of Historical Evidence for Miracles. Sophia 44 (1):7 - 23.score: 18.0
    In his book The Concept of Miracle and his paper ‘For the Possibility of Miracles’ Swinburne claims that there are no logical difficulties in supposing that there could be strong historical evidence for the occurrence of miracles. This claim is based on three assertions; two of which I demonstrate are only true contingently. In this paper I identify several logical difficulties regarding the possibility of attaining historical evidence for the occurrence of miracles. On the strength of these (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Jake H. O'Connell (2013). Divine Hiddenness: Would More Miracles Solve the Problem? Heythrop Journal 54 (2):261-267.score: 18.0
    This article addresses the question of whether God's existence would be obvious to everyone if God performed more miracles. I conclude that it would not be so. I look at cases where people have been confronted with what they believe to be miracles and have either not come to believe in God, or have come to intellectual belief in God but declined to follow him. God's existence could be made undeniable not by spectacular signs, but only by God (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Catherine Legg (2001). Naturalism and Wonder: Peirce on the Logic of Hume's Argument Against Miracles. Philosophia 28 (1-4):297-318.score: 18.0
    Peirce wrote that Hume’s argument against miracles (which is generally liked by twentieth century philosophers for its antireligious conclusion) "completely misunderstood the true nature of" ’abduction’. This paper argues that if Hume’s argumentative strategy were seriously used in all situations (not just those in which we seek to "banish superstition"), it would deliver a choking epistemological conservatism. It suggests that some morals for contemporary naturalistic philosophy may be drawn from Peirce’s argument against Hume.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 926