Miracles and the limits of medical knowledge.

In considering whether medical miracles occur, the limits of epistemology bring us to confront our metaphysical worldview of medicine and nature in general. This raises epistemological questions of a higher order. David Hume's understanding of miracles as violations of the laws of nature assumes that nature is completely regular, whereas doctrines such as C. S. Peirce's "tychism" hold that there is an element of absolute chance in the workings of the universe. Process philosophy gives yet another view of the working of nature. Physicians have no epistemological grounds for declaring any cure to be miraculous. Miracles are theological (or philosophical) entities, and not medical entities. All physicians can do is to determine whether or not a cure is scientifically inexplicable according to the current epistemological standards of medical science. As these standards change, what is currently unexplainable may become explainable. However, we can also come to realize that our current explanations are in fact unsatisfactory. Our justifications of knowledge claims about miracles will depend on our views about determinism and indeterminism. If the universe is not a deterministic one, we should be open to the possibility of encountering what appear to us as sui generis events. These would not be violations of immutable laws of nature, but manifestations of the true workings of nature, and certainly causes for wonder.