Responses to the possibility of miracles

HideShow resource information
Rudolph Otto responds to miracles by defining them as...
1) supernatural 2) public and 3) scientifically inexplicable
1 of 18
Aquinas defines miracles in three ways. Name them.
1) Incredible and within the normal realm 2) Normal and outside the realm of nature and 3) incredible and beyond the normal realms
2 of 18
"a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the Deity, or by the interposition of some invisible agent." - why is this definition so clever and who wrote this?
Hume, and it's clever because it undermines the possibility of miracles (a law is not a law if it is broken)
3 of 18
Quote Hume on miracles
"a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the Deity, or by the interposition of some invisible agent."
4 of 18
Why are miracles potentially incoherent?
If a law can be broken then it ceases to be a law
5 of 18
Why could miracles be perceived as irrational?
If we should always believe the most probable thing, the explanation for the miracle (tiredness, hallucination etc.) is always more reliable
6 of 18
Hume said that it was no coincidence that miracles were...
more frequent in "barbarous nations"
7 of 18
How could God's attributes make miracles incoherent?
Because if God sees everything s/he should not need to intervene, furthermore how can such a transcendent God intervene without becoming immanent?
8 of 18
How would Swinburne's principle of credulity resolve some of Hume's criticisms?
We should trust each other's testimony as "the experiences of others are (probably) as they report them"
9 of 18
Why is the subjectivity of miracles an issue?
God is clearly unfair not to intervene all the time, why would God go about putting Jesus' face on toast instead of helping solve world poverty?
10 of 18
How does Swinburne address the incoherency of miracles?
He claims that a one off exception has occurred which means the law can remain a law yet the miracle can be special
11 of 18
How does Wiles address these issues?
He interprets miracles symbolically as individual miracles would make God arbitrary and weak
12 of 18
Apply Wittgenstein's language game to the concept of miracles
Science and religion are a separate language game thus religion does not need to justify itself to science
13 of 18
Realists...
...Believe that miracles can happen as God (who is an ontological reality) can, and does, perform miracles to increase faith
14 of 18
anti-realists...
...view miracles as symbolic, objective and only comprehensible to the believer. Miracles help the believer understand God more
15 of 18
Religious plurality could pose an issue as...
How can you undermine a different religious believers miracle whilst promoting your own?
16 of 18
Ockram's razor addresses this by claiming that...
We should trust the simplest explanation
17 of 18
Problems with Ockram's razor?
It is incredibly arbitrary and subjective
18 of 18

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

1) Incredible and within the normal realm 2) Normal and outside the realm of nature and 3) incredible and beyond the normal realms

Back

Aquinas defines miracles in three ways. Name them.

Card 3

Front

Hume, and it's clever because it undermines the possibility of miracles (a law is not a law if it is broken)

Back

Preview of the back of card 3

Card 4

Front

"a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the Deity, or by the interposition of some invisible agent."

Back

Preview of the back of card 4

Card 5

Front

If a law can be broken then it ceases to be a law

Back

Preview of the back of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Philosophy resources:

See all Philosophy resources »See all Ideas of gods resources »