The supernatural and the miraculous

Sophia 46 (3):277 - 285 (2007)
Abstract
Both intention-based and causation-based definitions of the miraculous make reference to the term ‘supernatural’. Philosophers who define the miraculous appear to use this term in a loose way, perhaps meaning the nonnatural, perhaps meaning a subcategory of the nonnatural. Here I examine the aetiology of the term ‘supernatural’. I consider three outstanding issues regarding the meaning of the term and conclude that the supernatural is best understood as a subcategory of the nonnatural. In light of this clarification, I argue that a prominent causation-based definition of the miraculous should be revised so as not refer to the supernatural. I further argue that authors of intention-based definitions of the miraculous need to consider whether or not they should continue to refer to the supernatural, in their definitions of the miraculous, in light of the conclusions discerned here.
Keywords Supernatural  Nonnatural  Miracle  Causation-based definition  Intention-based definition
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11841-007-0030-7
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
Edit this record
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Mark as duplicate
Request removal from index
Revision history
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 30,781
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Miracles and Violations.Timothy Pritchard - 2011 - Religious Studies 47 (1):41-58.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total downloads
47 ( #115,025 of 2,199,744 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #61,798 of 2,199,744 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads
My notes
Sign in to use this feature