Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T04:02:14.835Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Miracles: metaphysics, physics, and physicalism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 May 2008

KIRK MCDERMID
KIRK MCDERMID
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy and Religion, Montclair State University, Montclair, NJ 07403
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Debates about the metaphysical compatibility between miracles and natural laws often appear to prejudge the issue by either adopting or rejecting a strong physicalist thesis (the idea that the physical is all that exists). The operative component of physicalism is a causal closure principle: that every caused event is a physically caused event. If physicalism and this strong causal closure principle are accepted, then supernatural interventions are ruled out tout court, while rejecting physicalism gives miracles metaphysical carte blanche. This paper argues for a more moderate version of physicalism that respects important physicalist intuitions about causal closure while allowing for miracles' logical possibility. A recent proposal for a specific mechanism for the production of miracles (Larmer (1996d)) is criticized and rejected. In its place, two separate mechanisms (suitable for deterministic and indeterministic worlds, respectively) are proposed that do conform to a more moderate physicalism, and their potential and limitations are explored.

Type
Articles
Information
Religious Studies , Volume 44 , Issue 2 , June 2008 , pp. 125 - 147
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Albert, David Z. (1994) Quantum Mechanics and Experience (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basinger, David (1984) ‘Miracles as violations: some clarifications’, Southern Journal of Philosophy, 22, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basinger, David & Randall, Basinger (1986) Philosophy and Miracle: The Contemporary Debate (Lewiston NY: Edwin Mellen Press).Google Scholar
Burns, Robert M. (1981) The Great Debate on Miracles: From Joseph Glanvill to David Hume (Lewisburg PA: Bucknell University Press).Google Scholar
Collier, John (1996) ‘Against miracles’, in Larmer, R. (ed.) Questions of Miracle (Toronto: McGill-Queen's University Press). Originally published in Dialogue, 25 (1986), 349–352.Google Scholar
Flew, Antony (1967) ‘Miracles’, The Encyclopedia of Philosophy (New York NY: Macmillan), V, 346.Google Scholar
Hawking, Stephen (1993) Black Holes and Baby Universes (New York NY: Bantam Books).Google Scholar
Howson, Colin & Peter, Urbach (1993) Scientific Reasoning: The Bayesian Approach (London: Open Court Publishing Co.).Google Scholar
Kasher, Hannah (1999) ‘Biblical miracles and the universality of natural laws: Maimonides' three methods of harmonization’, Journal of Jewish Thought and Philosophy, 8, 25–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larmer, Robert A. (1996a) ‘Miracles and the laws of nature’, in idem (ed.) Questions of Miracle (Toronto: McGill-Queen's University Press). Originally published in Dialogue, 24 (1985), 227–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1996b) ‘Against “Against miracles”’, in idem Questions of Miracle; originally published in Sophia, 27 (1988), 20–25.Google Scholar
(1996c) ‘Miracles and conservation laws: A reply to Professor MacGill’, in idem Questions of Miracle; originally published in Sophia, 31 (1992), 89–95.Google Scholar
(1996d) (ed.) Water into Wine?: An Investigation of the Concept of Miracle (Toronto: McGill-Queen's University Press).Google Scholar
Leibniz, Wilhelm (1714) The Monadology. Also available at: http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/pdf/leibmon.pdfGoogle Scholar
MacGill, Neil Whyte (1996) ‘Miracles and conservation laws’, in Larmer Questions of Miracle; originally published in Sophia, 31 (1992), 79–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKinnon, Alastair (1967) ‘Miracle and paradox’, American Philosophical Quarterly, 4, 308–314.Google Scholar
Noether, Emmy (1971) ‘Invariant variation problems’ (M.A. Travel, Trans.), Transport Theory and Statistical Physics, 1, 183–207 (original work published 1918).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Odegard, Douglas (1982) ‘Miracles and good evidence’, Religious Studies, 18, 37–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, Ivars (2004) ‘Heads or tails?’, Science News, 165. Also available at: http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20040228/mathtrek.aspGoogle Scholar
Sklar, Lawrence (1993) Physics and Chance: Philosophical Issues in the Foundations of Statistical Mechanics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swinburne, Richard (1970) The Concept of Miracle (London: Macmillan).CrossRefGoogle Scholar