Do miracles contradict science

Answer 1

Not necessarily. The concept of miracle can be said to be incoherent or contradictory if and only if our philosophy of science holds that a law of science is a necessary truth regardless of it's conjunction to other states of affairs. A miracle then would by definition have to be concieved of as the suspention of some scientific law or set of scientific laws. Thus the concept of miracle would then necessarily be false, it would be a contradiction, and incoherent.

However, if it is not the case that a law of science is a necessary truth regardless of it's conjunction to other states of affairs, then one cannot speak of miracle as an incoherent concept. Moreover, it is not logically possible that a law of science can be a necessary truth without regard to it's conjunction to other true states of affairs. Indeed, all beings and phenomena within the causal universe, that is to say, within the actual universe, without regard to their conjunction to other states of affairs are contingencies. This includes the laws of science, which can only be concieved of as necessary truths if expressed within conjunction to other true states of affairs. In other words Scientific laws can only be considered necessary, if expressed conditionally. (ie. when we say "the law of gravity dictates that the apple must fall to the ground" it is not a necessary truth that the apple must fall to the ground, indeed the truth of the statement that "the apple must fall to the ground" is conditional. It is the consequent that follows from specific antecedent states of affairs.)Thus one cannot say that the concept of miracle (insofar as a miracle is conceived of as some occurrence within the natural order, which is in principle, inexplicable in terms of the relevant natural causes operative at the time and place that the event occurs) is impossible, without the presupposition that there are absolutely no antecedents which cannot in principle be explained in terms of "natural laws".