|
|
|
dv82matt
SFN Regular
760 Posts |
 Posted - 11/10/2005 : 21:15:34 [Permalink]
|
| "Rev. Dr." Lenny Flank puts it very well. Just to nitpick though, although the supernatural may not specifically be excluded by science it is excluded nonetheless. As Dave pointed out as soon as a supernatural hypothesis makes itself amenable to the tools and methods of science, it is no longer supernatural. The supernatural is excluded from science because it is defined as phenomena that are not amenable to the scientific method. |
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 11/10/2005 : 21:28:52 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
Geez, H., have the decency to put in a link to your own book review.  
Dave, all my posts have a link to my book review. [Hint: it's in the sig.]
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 11/10/2005 : 21:36:51 [Permalink]
|
I'm not sure that I didn't misspeak, Matt.
As is becoming obvious to me, this may be solely another definition problem. "Supernatural" means a lot more to people than just "not amenable to the scientific method." Right now, for example, formulating and testing hypotheses about who will fall in love with whom could be considered "supernatural" under that definition.
Plus, were God to come to Earth and grant us the opportunity to test Him and His abilities, surely He would still be thought of as "supernatural." "LOOK AT THAT PENGUIN," He might say and POOF, "IT NOW HAS FOUR ASSES. WANNA SEE ME DO THAT AGAIN?" What would happen is that instead of God becoming not "supernatural," the definition of "natural" would change to be "whatever is discoverable through science, plus whatever the heck God wants to do."
(H.: Oh, duh. [Smacks forehead] At least I never claimed to be observant of all details.) |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
dv82matt
SFN Regular
760 Posts |
Posted - 11/10/2005 : 23:44:54 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
I'm not sure that I didn't misspeak, Matt.
As is becoming obvious to me, this may be solely another definition problem. "Supernatural" means a lot more to people than just "not amenable to the scientific method."
We sure get a lot of these definitional problems around here. ;) But yeah, I agree that supernatural generally means more than just "not ameanable to scientific scrutiny". However, it is an essential part of what it means to be supernatural in practice if not in principle.quote:
Right now, for example, formulating and testing hypotheses about who will fall in love with whom could be considered "supernatural" under that definition.
Well if you're able to test them then they must be ameanable to scientific inquiry. But I do get your point, not everything that is irrational or unevidenced is supernatural, take 'bigfoot' for example.quote:
Plus, were God to come to Earth and grant us the opportunity to test Him and His abilities, surely He would still be thought of as "supernatural." "LOOK AT THAT PENGUIN," He might say and POOF, "IT NOW HAS FOUR ASSES. WANNA SEE ME DO THAT AGAIN?" What would happen is that instead of God becoming not "supernatural," the definition of "natural" would change to be "whatever is discoverable through science, plus whatever the heck God wants to do."
We would obviously have to redefine what we think of as supernatural in that case. My feeling is that God would no longer be supernatural since science could verify his existence and other properties.
Edited to point out that if God were to come to Earth and grant us the opportunity to test Him and His abilities, then God and His abilities would be discoverable through science so there would be no need to add, "plus whatever the heck God wants to do." |
| Edited by - dv82matt on 11/11/2005 00:25:40 |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 11/10/2005 : 23:54:45 [Permalink]
|
| One point not mentioned here is these supposed supernatural events usually can't even be shown to have happened. Research on prayer isn't turning up much in the way of results. Benny Henn isn't really curing anyone. There isn't any evidence for ghosts or magical creation of crop circles. Lots of people believe these supernatural things occur on a regular basis but I challenge that assumption. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2005 : 01:39:52 [Permalink]
|
Science does not exclude, a priori, anything (including the supernatural).
Reality excludes the supernatural all on its own.
Why? Because if something you attribute to the supernatural actually exists, then it isn't really supernatural. It is a part of the natural world.
Really, "supernatural" (and all of it's synonyms, like "paranormal") are words devoid of any meaning.
These meaning-free words exist because people insist on believing things which have no evidence to support them. They need a vocabulary to describe things for which no evidence exists.
There is no such thing as the "supernatural" because anything for which evidence exists is a part of the natural world.
That said, we have a proven track record of finding natural explanations (along with the evidence to support them) for many things previously considered supernatural.
There is no reason to expect that this trend won't continue.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Maverick
Skeptic Friend
Sweden
385 Posts |
Posted - 11/18/2005 : 01:47:58 [Permalink]
|
| I have to agree with Dude. This is what I've been saying now and then to people who use the word "supernatural". I mean, what is the difference between the natural and the supernatural? People don't know, they can only give examples of what would be counted as supernatural. They're wrong. If something exists, including fairies, what on Earth makes them supernatural while a new species found in the Amazonas is natural? |
"Life is but a momentary glimpse of the wonder of this astonishing universe, and it is sad to see so many dreaming it away on spiritual fantasy." -- Carl Sagan |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 11/18/2005 : 02:28:03 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Maverick
I have to agree with Dude. This is what I've been saying now and then to people who use the word "supernatural". I mean, what is the difference between the natural and the supernatural? People don't know, they can only give examples of what would be counted as supernatural. They're wrong. If something exists, including fairies, what on Earth makes them supernatural while a new species found in the Amazonas is natural?
Natural and supernatural are concepts. Something that is "beyond" or "outside" what we perceive to be the normal laws of nature is supernatural. If a man can float and pass through walls--that's supernatural according the laws of nature as we currently understand them. It seems silly to say "Oh, passing through walls is perfectly natural, we've just never seen it before."
The supernatural, if it existed, would be "real" and interact with our world, but by definition it wouldn't be of it or constrained by its laws.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 11/18/2005 02:33:31 |
|
|
|
Maverick
Skeptic Friend
Sweden
385 Posts |
Posted - 11/18/2005 : 03:02:17 [Permalink]
|
| As far as I understand, there is a possibility for an object to pass through a wall. And what I meant by saying that there is nothing supernatural and that everything is natural, is that if something exists, then it is natural like everything else. If we don't know about it, or if we make stuff up and decide that it's supernatural, then the supernatural is whatever doesn't exist or whatever we haven't seen yet. So either way it seems that nothing is supernatural. I'm not sure how to explain this in any other way, really. |
"Life is but a momentary glimpse of the wonder of this astonishing universe, and it is sad to see so many dreaming it away on spiritual fantasy." -- Carl Sagan |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 11/18/2005 : 03:23:30 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Maverick
As far as I understand, there is a possibility for an object to pass through a wall. And what I meant by saying that there is nothing supernatural and that everything is natural, is that if something exists, then it is natural like everything else. If we don't know about it, or if we make stuff up and decide that it's supernatural, then the supernatural is whatever doesn't exist or whatever we haven't seen yet. So either way it seems that nothing is supernatural. I'm not sure how to explain this in any other way, really.
Mav, like I said, the supernatural is a concept. You can choose to define natural as "anything that exists," but you won't find that definition in any dictionary. (My dictionary defines natural as "occurring in conformity with the ordinary course of nature: not marvelous or supernatural.")
Why you would change the meanings of words in an attempt to pretend such a category as "supernatural" can't exist I have no idea. All it means is that you aren't using words to mean the same things the rest of us are.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 11/18/2005 03:25:23 |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 11/19/2005 : 00:51:53 [Permalink]
|
quote:
The supernatural, if it existed, would be "real" and interact with our world, but by definition it wouldn't be of it or constrained by its laws.
quote:
Why you would change the meanings of words in an attempt to pretend such a category as "supernatural" can't exist I have no idea. All it means is that you aren't using words to mean the same things the rest of us are.
This may just be arguing semantics, but...
WHen I say the words "supernatural" and "paranormal" are meaning free, I only mean in the context of valid explanations for observed events.
If you observe something, unless you are claiming the ability to percieve things outside the bounds of the natural world, it is (by definition) a part of the natural world.
Even granting the possibility of something existing apart from our universe, if it has the ability to interact with this universe, it then is (again, by definition) a part of this universe while it is doing so.
So yes, "supernatural" and "paranormal" have meaning within specific contexts, just not in the context of valid explanations for observable events.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 11/19/2005 : 01:48:20 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
When I say the words "supernatural" and "paranormal" are meaning free, I only mean in the context of valid explanations for observed events.
And on that we agree totally. Describing something as "supernatural" is indeed an attempt to assert a claim while trying to avoid ever having to provide tangible evidence for it.
quote:
If you observe something, unless you are claiming the ability to percieve things outside the bounds of the natural world, it is (by definition) a part of the natural world.
Hmm. I would agree that it would have to have a presence in the natural world, "one foot in our reality" so to speak, but I'm not sure that much alone would qualify it as natural itself, especially if the "other foot" remains out.
quote:
Even granting the possibility of something existing apart from our universe, if it has the ability to interact with this universe, it then is (again, by definition) a part of this universe while it is doing so.
Well, "part of" is a somewhat vague concept. If I stroll onto a college campus, I'm not automatically a "part of" that school except in the most literal of senses. Similarly, something just here visiting from someplace else I wouldn't say is "part of" our world, except in the most fleeting temporal sense.
However, your point that the supernatural must necessarily interact with the natural to be at all perceived is well noted. I will admit that I personal find that impossible. While I see how such a thing as the "supernatural" can exist as a concept, I see no way for it to have a "common language" with the natural--a gray area where to two may interact and have an effect upon one another. How does spirit move matter? How does matter contain spirit? I find these to be nonsense questions.
quote:
So yes, "supernatural" and "paranormal" have meaning within specific contexts, just not in the context of valid explanations for observable events.
Right.
By the way, it's good to see you posting again, Dude. It seems like you've been making yourself scarce lately.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 11/19/2005 : 07:39:55 [Permalink]
|
quote:
By the way, it's good to see you posting again, Dude. It seems like you've been making yourself scarce lately.
Been preoccupied. First with some classes. Then with a stupid on-the-job injury. Hurt my lower back and left ilio-sacral joint (a small, and previously unknown to me, joint between your pelvis and lower spine). Had a reaction to one of the meds (ibuprophen, apparently) and was bleeding from, well, anywhere you think it is possible to be bleeding from, I was. Add in physical therapy for the back injury and its been a hectic couple of months. Had to request a withdrawl from my classes... a dissapointment to be sure. But now have a few minutes of free time in which to participate.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
Posted - 11/19/2005 : 07:59:13 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
quote:
By the way, it's good to see you posting again, Dude. It seems like you've been making yourself scarce lately.
Been preoccupied. First with some classes. Then with a stupid on-the-job injury. Hurt my lower back and left ilio-sacral joint (a small, and previously unknown to me, joint between your pelvis and lower spine). Had a reaction to one of the meds (ibuprophen, apparently) and was bleeding from, well, anywhere you think it is possible to be bleeding from, I was. Add in physical therapy for the back injury and its been a hectic couple of months. Had to request a withdrawl from my classes... a dissapointment to be sure. But now have a few minutes of free time in which to participate.
Oh my! Hope you're better now, though - joint pain is a bitch (and a very intimate bitch to me). I don't even want to imagine how it feels in the back. |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
