According to john mackie: "whether the laws of nature are deterministic or statistical, we can give a coherent definition of a miracle as a supernatural intrusion into the normally closed system that works in accordance with those laws, and in either case we can identify conceivable occurrences, and alleged occurrences, which if they were to occur, or have occurred, could be believed with high probability, though not known with certainly, to satisfy that definition." which of the following best summarizes his main point here?
a. supernatural intrusions (miracles) are possible if the laws of nature are statistical or deterministic
b. it makes it fair that innocent others must suffer terribly so that the rest of us may have an interesting, character-building yet tragic world in which to live
c. it presumes that all evil is caused by humans
d. a violation of the laws of nature.

Answer:

A) Supernatural intrusion ( miracle ) is possible if the law of nature is statistical and deterministic.  

Explanation:

The law of nature are statistical and deterministic, these laws are strict, not statistical and deterministic according to the law of classical determinism. There would be a condition that is not under our control and all our actions.  

The strict law +independent conditions = Personal action. All this action happened by the event of the pattern but even the patterns are not conformed to the strict law of nature.

option c

explanation:

strive for superiority

question - in 1827, john walker, a druggist in a small english town, tipped a splint with sulphur, chlorate of potash, and sulphid of antimony, and rubbed it on sandpaper, and it burst into flame. the druggist had discovered the first friction-chemical match, the kind we use to-day. it is called friction-chemical because it is made by mixing certain chemicals together and rubbing them. although walker's match did not require the bottle of acid, nevertheless it was not a good one. it could be lighted only by hard rubbing, and it sputtered and threw fire in all directions. in a few years, however, phosphorus was substituted on the tip for antimony, and the change worked wonders. the match could now be lighted with very little rubbing, and it was no longer necessary to have sandpaper upon which to rub it. it would ignite when rubbed on any dry surface, and there was no longer any sputtering. this was the phosphorus match, the match with which we are so familiar. according the paragraph what was the benefit of the new phosphorus match? it burst into flame when rubbed on sandpaper. it was made by mixing chemicals. it could be ignited on any dry surface. it threw fire in all directions.

answer - matches required natural chemicals