|
The epistemic theory of miracles is the name given by the philosopher William Vallicella to the theory of miraculous events given by St. Augustine and Baruch Spinoza. According to the theory, there are no events contrary to nature — that is no "transgressions", in Hume's sense, of the laws of nature. An event is a miracle only in the sense that it does not agree with our ''understanding'' of nature, or fit our picture of nature, or that it thwarts our expectations as to how the world should behave. According to a perfect scientific understanding there would be no miracles at all. The name of the theory is derived from the Ancient Greek word , ''episteme'', meaning "well-founded knowledge". == Augustine's account == In The City of God, Book XXI, Chapter 8, Augustine quotes Marcus Varro, ''Of the Race of the Roman People'': :There occurred a remarkable celestial portent; for Castor records that, in the brilliant star Venus, called Vesperugo by Plautus, and the lovely Hesperus by Homer, there occurred so strange a prodigy, that it changed its colour, size, form, course, which never appeared before nor since. Adrastus of Cyzicus, and Dion of Naples, famous mathematicians, said that this occurred in the reign of Ogyges. : So great an author as Varro would certainly not have called this a portent had it not seemed to be contrary to nature. For we say that all portents are contrary to nature; but they are not so. For how is that contrary to nature which happens by the will of God, since the will of so mighty a Creator is certainly the nature of each created thing? A portent, therefore, happens not contrary to nature, but contrary to what we know as nature.〔Modern Library, p. 776, tr. Dods, emphasis added〕 Augustine argues that there can be no true transgression of the laws of nature, because everything that happens according to God's will happens by nature, and a transgression of the laws of nature would therefore happen contrary to God's will. A miracle therefore is not contrary to nature as it really is, but only contrary to nature as our current understanding supposes it to be (''Portentum ergo fit non contra naturam, sed contra quam est nota natura''). For example, if we were to see a man walking on water, and the man really were walking on water, that would not be possible given the laws of nature ''as we understand them''. (The surface tension of water is not great enough to support a man's weight.) But it is logically possible that our understanding of the laws of nature is incomplete, and that there are special psychophysical laws, unknown to us, that allow certain human beings possessing great powers of concentration to affect by force of will alone the surface tension of water. If that were so in the case of Jesus, there would be nothing truly unnatural about his walking on water. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Epistemic theory of miracles」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|