Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T07:46:23.996Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A reply to Robert Larmer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 May 2008

KIRK McDERMID
KIRK McDERMID
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy and Religion, Montclair State University, Montclair, NJ 07403
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The metaphysics of miracles put forward in my article, ‘Miracles: metaphysics, physics and physicalism’, above (125–147) are, argues Robert Larmer, both unnecessary and unworkable. Here, I try more clearly to explain that my goal of saving important physicalist intuitions that are incompatible with both the ‘open-systems’ and ‘exemption’ approaches’ use of powerful ceteris paribus clauses. I also defend the two mechanisms proposed in the paper from Larmer's criticisms.

Type
Articles
Information
Religious Studies , Volume 44 , Issue 2 , June 2008 , pp. 161 - 164
Copyright
Copyright © 2008 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Albert, David Z. (1994) Quantum Mechanics and Experience (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
Hahn, Erwin L. (1953) ‘Free nuclear induction’, Physics Today, 6, 4–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sklar, Lawrence (1993) Physics and Chance: Philosophical Issues in the Foundations of Statistical Mechanics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar