Final answer:
A miracle, as described in conjunction with Gregor, refers to an event defying natural laws, implying divine intervention. Events like surviving an accident or winning the lottery, while extraordinary, do not qualify as miracles since they don't violate natural laws. Proving an event as a miracle is quite difficult as it requires irrefutable evidence and the exclusion of all natural explanations.
Step-by-step explanation:
When discussing Gregor and the concept he describes as "nearly a miracle," we might look for an example within literature or in the context of religious texts or philosophical discourse. A miracle, in the strictest sense, refers to an event which violates the natural laws, suggesting it could only be enacted by a divine being, such as God. For an event to be classified as a miracle, it must not only lack natural explanations but also provide clear, compelling evidence that precludes any speculative or future natural explanations. Therefore, winning the Lotto, while exceptionally unlikely, would not meet this strict definition. More to the point, surviving an auto accident, despite its rarity, is not considered a miracle since it does not violate the laws of nature and can be explained through natural forces and survival mechanisms.
An example that could be considered a miracle would be an event where the only plausible explanation is supernatural intervention, disallowing any considerations for optical illusions, advanced technologies, or other far-fetched rationalizations. Therefore, proving something as a miracle is immensely challenging, as it demands removal of all doubt and alternative explanations, which is rare in rational discourse due to the finite nature of human observation and understanding.