no-miracle argument

philosophy

Written by

The Information Architects of Encyclopaedia Britannica

Last updated

July 21, 2026

Quick Summary

The "no-miracle argument" is a philosophical argument for scientific realism. Scientific realism posits that scientific theories aim for a literally true account of the world, including unobservable entities. This contrasts with instrumentalism, which views theories as mere tools for prediction.

The no-miracle argument suggests that the success of scientific theories, particularly their ability to make accurate predictions and explain phenomena, would be a "miracle" if the theories were not at least approximately true. This argument highlights the extraordinary success of science in explaining and manipulating the world, implying that the best explanation for this success is the truth of the theories themselves.12

Summary created from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles.

4 Britannica Sources

Ask Britannica AI about this topic

Britannica doesn't have a full article on this topic, so we've curated a list of our relevant coverage.

Hilary Putnam
Realism and meaning
…be known as the “no-miracle” argument for realism. Putnam was equally critical of conventionalism, the view that logic, mathematics, and extensive portions of science do not express truths but are based on human stipulations—i.e., convention.
Read More
…be known as the “no-miracle” argument for realism. Putnam was equally critical of conventionalism, the view that logic, mathematics, and extensive portions of science do not express truths but are based on human stipulations—i.e., convention.
Read More