If a miracle is defined as a breach of natural law one can declare a priori that there are no miracles
If a miracle is defined as a breach of natural law, one can declare a priori that there are no miracles. It doesn't follow however, that there are no miracles in the religious sense of the term." Discuss. 25 Marks
From the Latin word miraculum meaning "object of wonder" enters the word miracle. Many definitions have been formed for the notion of a miracle but most would agree that it is most commonly an unexplainable extraordinary event, inspiring awe and wonder unto its witnesses. Similar definitions state that it is a "supernatural event, contrary to the established constitution and course of things or a deviation from the known laws of nature".
The term "a priori" refers primarily to the basis on which a proposition is known. If a statement has been written a priori it has been made without prior experience or empirical evidence of what it states. The author of the proposition has used reason to deduce his idea and it is not based on any observed fact.
Similar to the definitions above the philosopher Hume (1711-1776) offered his own definition, that miracles are "a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the deity" and Hume adds that a miracle could be defined as a "break in the natural order of events in the material world". For the most part Hume puts forward that miracles are 'impossible' and that testimony to miracles should never be trusted. This can be seen in Hume's first reason against the existence of miracles. He states that there has never been anyone attesting a miracle "of such unquestioned good-sense, education and learning, as to secure us against all delusion in themselves" and persuade us that a violation of a natural law is possible. Hume suggests that whenever anyone has witnessed a "miracle" they have been deluded into thinking so and this person has not used any reasoning to deduct the true nature of the event. Hume goes on to say that "no testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle unless the testimony be of such a kind that its falsehood would be more miraculous." According to Hume, "A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence" for Hume to believe in a miracle without any empirical evidence and only a testimony is without reason.
From the Latin word miraculum meaning "object of wonder" enters the word miracle. Many definitions have been formed for the notion of a miracle but most would agree that it is most commonly an unexplainable extraordinary event, inspiring awe and wonder unto its witnesses. Similar definitions state that it is a "supernatural event, contrary to the established constitution and course of things or a deviation from the known laws of nature".
The term "a priori" refers primarily to the basis on which a proposition is known. If a statement has been written a priori it has been made without prior experience or empirical evidence of what it states. The author of the proposition has used reason to deduce his idea and it is not based on any observed fact.
Similar to the definitions above the philosopher Hume (1711-1776) offered his own definition, that miracles are "a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the deity" and Hume adds that a miracle could be defined as a "break in the natural order of events in the material world". For the most part Hume puts forward that miracles are 'impossible' and that testimony to miracles should never be trusted. This can be seen in Hume's first reason against the existence of miracles. He states that there has never been anyone attesting a miracle "of such unquestioned good-sense, education and learning, as to secure us against all delusion in themselves" and persuade us that a violation of a natural law is possible. Hume suggests that whenever anyone has witnessed a "miracle" they have been deluded into thinking so and this person has not used any reasoning to deduct the true nature of the event. Hume goes on to say that "no testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle unless the testimony be of such a kind that its falsehood would be more miraculous." According to Hume, "A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence" for Hume to believe in a miracle without any empirical evidence and only a testimony is without reason.
