What does the word supernatural mean to you?

Page 5 of 5 [ 78 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Previous topic | Next topic

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

10 Sep 2010, 8:12 am

Sand wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

TeaEarlGreyHot wrote:

Anything designated 'supernatural' is really just something natural that we don't yet have an explanation for.

Actually, explanations can be made at a whim. Having a sound explanation is another matter entirely though. What that second explanation might be is totally beyond my imagination which is, I must admit, extremely limited..

Your humility is admirable. As for me, my imagination is unlimited. I can imagine everything just happening. I can imagine getting free matter and energy with no input of anything. I can imagine perpetual motion. I can imagine the life coming from mere chemicals all by itself. I can imagine everything being related to every other thing. I can imagine falling and missing the ground. I can imagine nuclear missiles turning into a whale and a petunia. I can imagine the universe if full of life everywhere, even in the harsh radiation flooded vacuum of space. I can imagine anything and if I can imagine it then it can be true!! !

Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

10 Sep 2010, 8:20 am

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Sand wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

TeaEarlGreyHot wrote:

Anything designated 'supernatural' is really just something natural that we don't yet have an explanation for.

Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt

Of course that involves thinking in terms of parallel universes, Something forbidden to Christian Fundamentalists who can only conceive the world in terms of the Bible.

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

10 Sep 2010, 8:25 am

Sand wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Sand wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

TeaEarlGreyHot wrote:

Anything designated 'supernatural' is really just something natural that we don't yet have an explanation for.

Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt

Of course that involves thinking in terms of parallel universes, Something forbidden to Christian Fundamentalists who can only conceive the world in terms of the Bible.

In terms of the Bible, we have God who is Almighty and all-wise. He is the lawmaker who endowed order upon His creation, and it is due to His provision of order that order is possible to be sought after and found.

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

10 Sep 2010, 8:47 am

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Sand wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Sand wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

TeaEarlGreyHot wrote:

Anything designated 'supernatural' is really just something natural that we don't yet have an explanation for.

Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt

Of course that involves thinking in terms of parallel universes, Something forbidden to Christian Fundamentalists who can only conceive the world in terms of the Bible.

As I indicated, as about an unscientific point of view as is possible.

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

10 Sep 2010, 9:09 am

Sand wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Sand wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Sand wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

TeaEarlGreyHot wrote:

Anything designated 'supernatural' is really just something natural that we don't yet have an explanation for.

Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt

Of course that involves thinking in terms of parallel universes, Something forbidden to Christian Fundamentalists who can only conceive the world in terms of the Bible.

As I indicated, as about an unscientific point of view as is possible.

As is philosophy in general, however this was the philosophical basis for the development of Science. It is "unscientific", however that does not make it any less of a valid foundation for the pursuit of objective truth.

Sand
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

10 Sep 2010, 10:30 am

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Sand wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Sand wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

Sand wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

TeaEarlGreyHot wrote:

Anything designated 'supernatural' is really just something natural that we don't yet have an explanation for.

Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt

Of course that involves thinking in terms of parallel universes, Something forbidden to Christian Fundamentalists who can only conceive the world in terms of the Bible.

As I indicated, as about an unscientific point of view as is possible.

I appreciate an honest response. Of course all scientific inquiry starts out as speculative philosophy, as does theology. But there is a vital difference as to how procedure moves from there. The essence of science is to hold the speculation as unacceptable until observation is obtained and confirmed by separate sources which provides some grounds for accepting the premises of the speculation. And there is always an opening in scientific acceptance for new data to undermine the original acceptance since this is how science advances. The foundation in science for objective truth always must have reference to reproduce able observed data. This is crucial and totally absent from theological dogma.

TeaEarlGreyHot
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Jul 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 28,982
Location: California

10 Sep 2010, 12:14 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

TeaEarlGreyHot wrote:

Anything designated 'supernatural' is really just something natural that we don't yet have an explanation for.

Actually, explanations can be made at a whim. Having a sound explanation is another matter entirely though.

I thought that was implied in my response. Silly me.

_________________
Still looking for that blue jean baby queen, prettiest girl I've ever seen.

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

10 Sep 2010, 8:01 pm

TeaEarlGreyHot wrote:

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

TeaEarlGreyHot wrote:

Anything designated 'supernatural' is really just something natural that we don't yet have an explanation for.

Actually, explanations can be made at a whim. Having a sound explanation is another matter entirely though.

I thought that was implied in my response. Silly me.

Implying is an action of the writer and inferring is an action of the reader. As such, you have indicated that you intended to imply that, however I just did not infer this then.

TeaEarlGreyHot
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Jul 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 28,982
Location: California

10 Sep 2010, 8:06 pm

Obviously. My point remains. You arguing semantics doesn't change that.

_________________
Still looking for that blue jean baby queen, prettiest girl I've ever seen.

iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

10 Sep 2010, 8:26 pm

TeaEarlGreyHot wrote:

Obviously. My point remains. You arguing semantics doesn't change that.

Why do you presume I'm arguing against that yet? I wasn't arguing against your point, but if you want me to argue against your point regarding all things being naturalistic whether we know the mechanisms or not, then I will. I was just adding my own option that anyone can come up with an explanation using any agent, whether the agent be God, time, chance, Martians, or Tribbles, but no matter how good the explanation is at explaining, if it is not accurate then it is not a good explanation.

greenblue
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Mar 2007
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,896
Location: Home

10 Sep 2010, 11:09 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:

TeaEarlGreyHot wrote:

Obviously. My point remains. You arguing semantics doesn't change that.

I don't see what is exactly your point on your response other than, apparantely, doing similar like sand did on his assertions against the english word supernatural. The explanation (pun?) that TeaEarlGreyHot stated, is really too evident to just dismiss it as some sort of semantics problem or the like, unless your bias has something to do with it or something else.

And well, to say it more clearly, the supernatural is just a label that some people put towards things that they believe it goes beyond the natural world, and that is becuase there is no knowledge about the hows and the whys of that phenomena, that can be tested empirically or reasonable being explained within scientific grounds, on a given time in history, thus, they conclude it must be supernatural, very much "The God of the Gaps". And given that that is just a label related to that as well as metaphysical entities, I don't particularly find much meaning to it other than what I stated. I mean, once the supernatural can actually be empirical tested, it is no longer supernatural.

So, is it a physicalist perspective rather than semantics really the problem?

_________________
?Everything is perfect in the universe - even your desire to improve it.?

techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,695
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

10 Sep 2010, 11:32 pm

Its a term with extremely transient value and I think needs to be looked at closer - mainly in that the ground of 'supernatural' only covers what we don't understand during the stretch of time that we don't understand it. It seems a bit pejorative as well in the sense that its typically used by most these days in the direction of things that we haven't come to consensus are actually real, thus it seems like a way to call something fanciful or pie-in-the-sky. Realistically though there's no such thing in any realistically sense - ie. if it's real its natural or part of the natural process, for the long stretch of time that it was even used by believers themselves seems bizarre to me because it shows that they had carved an artificial cleft between the physical and spiritual world, perhaps because they didn't have the best grip on the nuances of the physical world yet through science? I'm not sure but - my opinion is its a loaded and dodgy term.

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

11 Sep 2010, 7:32 am

Why are you guys making a difficult thing out of a non-difficult thing. Supernatural means not according to physical laws. Eventually we will find out ALL of the physical laws correctly and discover that EVERYTHING is natural.

ruveyn

techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,695
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

11 Sep 2010, 9:50 am

ruveyn wrote:

Lol, and do you see what you just said? That's exactly what this conversation is about - people who are strict materialists have no problem with it because the assumptions it puts out go directly in line with their beliefs, people who aren't strict materialists have just as much reason to take note of it as an insult.

Page 5 of 5 [ 78 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Jump to:

What does the word supernatural mean to you? Post Reply New Topic

What does the word supernatural mean to you?