Introduction to Miracles
Welcome to one of the most exciting topics in the Philosophy of Religion! When we hear the word miracle, we might think of a last-minute goal in a football match or surviving a bad accident. However, for your AQA A Level, we look at miracles through a philosophical lens. We explore whether God actually "steps into" the world to change things, or if miracles are just about how we interpret special events.
Don't worry if this seems a bit abstract at first. We will break it down into two main ways of looking at the world: Realism and Anti-Realism, and look at the famous "clash" between the ideas of David Hume and Maurice Wiles.
1. Defining Miracles: Two Main Perspectives
Before we can argue about whether miracles happen, we have to define what they are. Philosophers generally split into two camps:
A. The Realist View (The "It Really Happened" View)
A Realist believes that miracles are real, objective events that happen in the physical world, regardless of what people think about them. If Jesus walked on water, a Realist believes his feet actually touched H2O and he didn't sink.
Realists often define a miracle as a violation of a law of nature. This means God (a divine agent) steps in and "breaks" the rules of science (like gravity or biology) to make something happen.
B. The Anti-Realist View (The "Eye of the Beholder" View)
An Anti-Realist doesn't care whether the laws of science were broken. To them, a miracle is a natural event that has a special religious significance for the person experiencing it.
Example: Imagine a person is about to lose their home, and a long-lost relative suddenly sends them exactly the amount of money they need. Science can explain where the money came from, but for the person involved, it feels like a "miracle" because of its timing and meaning.
Quick Review:
- Realist: Miracles are objective facts; God intervenes in the world.
- Anti-Realist: Miracles are subjective interpretations; they are about meaning, not breaking science.
2. David Hume: The Great Skeptic
David Hume is your go-to scholar for the Realist definition, even though he used that definition to argue that miracles probably don't happen! Hume was an empiricist (someone who believes knowledge comes from experience).
Hume’s Definition
Hume famously defined a miracle as: "A transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the Deity."
In simpler terms: God chooses to "break" a law of nature.
Hume’s Argument Against Miracles
Hume doesn't say miracles are 100% impossible, but he says it is never rational to believe in them. Think of it like a set of weighing scales:
1. The Weight of Evidence: We have "firm and unalterable experience" that the laws of nature work. Every day, billions of people experience gravity. This is "maximal" evidence.
2. The Testimony: For a miracle to be believable, the evidence for it would have to be stronger than the evidence for the law of nature it broke. Hume says this has never happened.
3. The Quality of Witnesses: Hume argues that miracle stories usually come from "ignorant and barbarous nations" or people who are too excited by the "agreeable emotions" of wonder to be objective.
4. The "Canceling Out" Problem: Different religions all claim miracles to prove their God is the right one. Since these religions contradict each other, their miracles "destroy" each other’s credit.
Key Takeaway: Hume says that because a law of nature has been established by billions of observations, any report of a miracle is almost certainly a mistake, a lie, or a misunderstanding.
3. Maurice Wiles: The Anti-Realist Challenge
Maurice Wiles takes a very different approach. He doesn't look at the evidence like Hume; he looks at the character of God. Wiles is an Anti-Realist who believes God does not intervene in the world at all.
Why Wiles Rejects Intervening Miracles
Wiles argues that if God did perform miracles, God would be immoral or arbitrary.
The Analogy: Imagine a God who turns water into wine at a wedding (a minor miracle) but did nothing to stop the gas chambers in the Holocaust (a massive tragedy). Wiles says a God who helps with party drinks but ignores genocide is not a God worth worshipping.
Wiles’ View of God
Wiles believes:
1. The universe is a single, "unbroken" act of God.
2. God created the world with laws of nature and then "stepped back" to let it run.
3. The only "miracle" is the Creation itself.
4. When people talk about miracles today, they are just using symbolic language to describe how they feel close to God in a specific moment.
Did you know? Wiles’ view solves the "Problem of Evil" for some people. If God cannot intervene, we don't have to wonder why He doesn't stop suffering!
4. Comparing Hume and Wiles
This is where you gain AO2 marks (Analysis and Evaluation). You need to be able to compare these two thinkers.
Points of Comparison:
- Definitions: Hume sees miracles as violations of nature (Realist). Wiles sees them as symbols or interpretations (Anti-Realist).
- Reason for Rejection: Hume rejects them because the scientific evidence is too weak. Wiles rejects them because they make God look cruel/biased.
- Outcome: For Hume, a miracle is a failed claim of fact. For Wiles, a miracle is a meaningful story or "blik" (a way of seeing the world).
5. Significance for Religion
Why does this debate matter to believers? If you are a religious person, your view on miracles changes how you see God.
The Importance of Realist Miracles:
1. God’s Power: Miracles prove God is Omnipotent (all-powerful) and can overrule science.
2. God’s Love: Miracles like healing the sick show God is Benevolent (all-loving) and cares for individuals.
3. Authority: Miracles are often used as "credentials." For example, the Resurrection of Jesus is a miracle that gives authority to the Christian faith.
The Importance of Anti-Realist Miracles:
1. Personal Relationship: It allows believers to feel God is present in their daily lives without needing to prove science wrong.
2. Avoiding the Problem of Evil: As Wiles argued, it protects God from the charge of being "unfair" by not intervening for everyone.
Summary: Common Mistakes to Avoid
- Mistake: Thinking Hume was a believer because he used the word "Deity."
Correction: Hume was a skeptic; he used the religious definition just to show why it was illogical to believe it.
- Mistake: Thinking Wiles says miracles are "fake."
Correction: Wiles says they are "real" in terms of meaning and influence on a person’s life, even if they aren't physical "magic tricks" by God.
- Mistake: Confusing Realism with being a "scientist."
Correction: A Realist can be a believer who thinks God actually breaks science. Realism is just the belief that the event happened in the real world, not just in someone's head.
Memory Tip: Think of Hume as Hard-Evidence (Scientific focus) and Wiles as Why-God? (Moral/Character focus).