Dawid, Richard; Hartmann, Stephan
The No Miracles Argument without the Base Rate Fallacy.
According to an argument by Colin Howson, the no-miracles argument is contingent on committing the base-rate fallacy and is therefore bound to fail. We demonstrate that Howson's argument only applies to one of two versions of the no-miracles argument. The other, more considerate version is not adequately reconstructed in Howson's approach and thus remains unaffected by his line of reasoning. We provide a Bayesian reconstruction of this version of the no-miracles argument and show that it is valid. We then proceed to discuss a number of aspects of NMA on that basis.