Believing in Miracles

Zygon 37 (3):741-750 (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

David Hume’s arguments against believing reports of miracles are shown to be very weak. Laws of nature, I suggest, are best seen not as exceptionless rules but as context-dependent realizations of natural powers. In that context miracles transcend the natural order not as "violations" but as intelligible realizations of a divine supernatural purpose. Miracles are not parts of scientific theory but can be parts of a web of rational belief fully consistent with science. (edited)

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,063

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

David Hume and the Mysterious Shroud of Turin.Edward L. Schoen - 1991 - Religious Studies 27 (2):209 - 222.
Questions of Miracle.Robert A. H. Larmer (ed.) - 1996 - Carleton University Press.
Hume and miracles.Matthew C. Bagger - 1997 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 35 (2):237 - 251.
Questions of Miracle.Robert A. Larmer - 1998 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 43 (3):189 - 190.
Against Miracles as Law-Violations: A Neo-Aristotelian Approach.Archer Joel - 2015 - European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 7 (4):83--98.
Hume's Argument against Miracles.Tommaso Piazza - 2011 - In Michael Bruce & Steven Barbone (eds.), Just the Arguments. Chichester, West Sussex, U.K.: Wiley‐Blackwell. pp. 44–48.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-09-02

Downloads
149 (#151,168)

6 months
6 (#825,551)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?