4. Is it rational to believe in miracles?

‘Is it rational to believe in miracles?’ considers the most crucial question concerning miracles by scrutinizing existing arguments against belief in miracles. The best-known critic of belief in miracles is David Hume, an 18th-century Scottish philosopher. Hume makes two main claims against miracles: (i) in fact, there has never been enough evidence for miracles; (ii) on principle, it is always unreasonable to believe in miracles. Even if Hume’s arguments fail, it may be that gathering enough evidence for miracles is practically impossible. Therefore, even if we directly encountered a miracle, we would struggle to convince others and even ourselves that a miracle had really taken place.

3. Why do so many people believe in miracles?

‘Why do so many people believe in miracles?’ considers why it is that the belief in miracles is so widespread. It addresses a number of remarkable recent findings in psychology that seem to support the miracle bias hypothesis. According to this hypothesis, belief in miracles is widespread because humans are cognitively and developmentally biased towards forming and transmitting such a belief. The minimal counterintuitiveness theory suggests concepts that deviate slightly from intuitive expectations can be transmitted more successfully than common concepts that are compatible with expectations. This theory applies across cultures, which may be why miracle episodes are common irrespective of geographical location or religious tradition.

1. What are miracles?

The concept of a miracle is elusive. We all know roughly what a miracle is, yet we struggle to state a precise definition. The proper definition of a miracle has been disputed among philosophers for centuries. ‘What are miracles?’ considers a wide range of concrete examples that represent or misrepresent miracles, and examines which conditions are necessary or sufficient for the concept to apply. It looks at ‘miracles’ in sport, technology, and nature; coincidences and religious signs as miracles; and the concept of impossibility. It concludes that a miracle is a violation of the laws of nature that is caused by an intentional agent and has religious significance.

5. Can there be miracles without the supernatural?

The unique feature of miracles is their violation of the laws of nature. However, this very feature makes it difficult to justify belief in miracles because the laws of nature have been confirmed through solid and uniform scientific observation. If belief in miracles cannot be justified, what are the closest acts to miracles that we can rationally believe in? ‘Can there be miracles without the supernatural?’ considers altruistic acts, concluding that extremely altruistic acts are as close to miracles as any acts one can perform within the laws of nature and belief. It also asks whether altruism is a product of evolution or an incoherent concept.

2. What miracles are reported in religious texts?

‘What miracles are reported in religious texts?’ provides examples of miracles classified into three broad types: material miracles, biological miracles, and mental miracles. Material miracles can involve the production, transformation, or multiplication of substances; the controlling of weather, the sun, moon, or geographical features; walking on water, teleportation, bilocation, and levitation; transfiguration; and the displaying of signs such as stigmata. Biological miracles include controlling animals and plants; extraordinary childbirth; healing; and raising the dead. Mental miracles can be classified into three further types: supernatural perception; control of immaterial beings, such as angels, ghosts, and spirits; and spiritual communication. But why do miracle workers perform these acts in the first place?