Religious Studies



In defence of Mumford's definition of a miracle


MORGAN LUCK a1
a1 Department of Philosophy, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham NG7 2RD

Article author query
luck m   [Google Scholar] 
 

Abstract

In a recent paper in Religious Studies, Clarke criticizes Mumford's definition of a miracle as it fails to recognize a supernatural agent capable of intent. Clarke believes that in order for an event to qualify as a miracle a supernatural agent must intend it. It is my aim to dismiss this qualification and demonstrate how Mumford's intent-neutral definition is less problematic. I will do this by examining each of the three cases against Mumford's definition and give reason to reject Clarke's criticism and his own definition of a miracle.