No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
What a Miracle Really is
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 October 2008
Extract
Although an immense amount has been written about miracles by philosophers – and theologicans of a philosophical turn of mind – to the point where no one wants to read any more on the subject, there are still two very good reasons for writing about miracles: (1) the concept of a miracle commonly employed simply will not do, so that most of the talk of discovering whether or not some event is miraculous is beside the point; (2) the proper way of looking at what a miracle is involves one in clarifying the very perplexing notions of agency and explanation, and both of these notions are interesting in their own right.
Information
- Type
- Research Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1976
References
page 50 note 1 Consequently, for example, while I both agree and disagree with many of the things said by Young, Robert, ‘Miracles and epistemology’, Religious Studies (June 1972)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, we are really not discussing the same subject.
page 50 note 2 E.g. by McKinnon, Alastair, ‘“Miracle” and “Paradox”’, American Philosophical Quarterly (1967).Google Scholar The argument occurs on pp. 309, 310.
page 50 note 3 Enquiry, ch. 10, p. 125 (Open Court).
page 51 note 1 Smart, Ninian, Philosophers and Religious Truth, ch. 2.Google Scholar
page 52 note 1 Lecky, W. E. H., The Rise and Influence of Rationalism in Europe, p. 65.Google Scholar
page 52 note 2 Walker, William, A History of the Christian Church, p. 333.Google Scholar
page 52 note 3 W. E. H. Lecky, p. 83
- 3
- Cited by