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. © 2008 Cambridge University Press.
CITATION STYLE
Larmer, R. A. (2008). Miracles, physicalism, and the laws of nature. Religious Studies. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0034412507009274
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.