The relationship between science and miracles has long been a subject of philosophical debate. This page explores why science cannot prove the existence of miracles and presents evidence that challenges miraculous claims.
If miracles are defined as supernatural events that defy natural laws, then science cannot confirm their existence.
To understand why science cannot prove miracles, we must first define these terms:
Science operates under the principle of methodological naturalism, which means it seeks natural explanations for phenomena. By definition, miracles involve supernatural causes, which fall outside the scope of scientific inquiry.
Scientific methods rely on repeatability and testability. Miracles, by their nature, are often unique, unrepeatable events, making them difficult to subject to scientific scrutiny.
A key principle of science is falsifiability - the ability to prove a hypothesis false. Miraculous explanations often cannot be falsified, as they rely on supernatural causes that cannot be tested or disproven.
Carl Sagan's famous quote applies here. Miracles, being extraordinary claims, would require a level of evidence that often surpasses what can be gathered after the fact.
Science always seeks the most parsimonious explanation. Even if an event seems miraculous, science will first exhaust all possible natural explanations before considering supernatural ones.
While science cannot definitively disprove all miraculous claims, it provides natural explanations for many alleged miracles and demonstrates the unreliability of anecdotal evidence. The lack of verifiable, repeatable evidence for miracles under controlled conditions suggests that natural explanations are more likely for seemingly miraculous events.