Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Three Kinds of Creationists
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 256 of 432 (657782)
03-30-2012 1:10 PM
Reply to: Message 250 by jar
03-30-2012 12:56 PM


Re: Supernatural 101
jar writes:
Well you and your leprechaun have a good day.
We will. Because I shall be having a joyous time investigating the (potentially supernatural) abilities of our little green friend.
Your claim that the supernatural is inherently immune from investigation has been shown to be false. Of course you will never accept this.....Immunity from investigation is too much a part of your own supernatural beliefs to ever accept otherwise.
But there you go.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 250 by jar, posted 03-30-2012 12:56 PM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1503 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 257 of 432 (657783)
03-30-2012 1:13 PM
Reply to: Message 248 by Taq
03-30-2012 12:52 PM


Re: Supernatural 101
Tag writes:
We can play what if all we want. Science focuses on what is. What we can imagine is also irrelevant to what actually is.
Argument from authority about to rear it's head:
Hmmpff, Albert Einstein said that imagination is more important than knowledge.
But your point is taken. However....
If you ever go camping and you feel something squirming around in your sleeping bag, the thought that you imagine it is a venomous snake as opposed to the fact that it is a harmless mouse is relevant if it causes you to break your neck trying to flee.

"You were not there for the beginning. You will not be there for the end. Your knowledge of what is going on can only be superficial and relative" William S. Burroughs

This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by Taq, posted 03-30-2012 12:52 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 260 by Taq, posted 03-30-2012 1:19 PM 1.61803 has seen this message but not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


(2)
Message 258 of 432 (657785)
03-30-2012 1:15 PM
Reply to: Message 214 by Buzsaw
03-30-2012 8:08 AM


Tempting Fate
Since this is in Free For All...
quote:
Ok, Mr/Ms Panda, how about you do the EvC thing and cite three or four examples of Buzsaw stupidity in the Science Fora. You have 8+ years to cherry pick them from.
One could say that tempting fate by issuing such an easily met challenge is itself stupid - there is something of an embarrassment of riches...
But here's a few examples from one thread and it's follow-on:
1) Citing a website devoted to penny stocks as an authority on hurricane frequency without doing adequate checks on the claims it made Message 256 In fact it turned out to rely on assuming that a list of selected major hurricanes was a complete list of major hurricanes making landfall in the U.S. Wrong! (It wasn't even restricted to hurricanes making landfall in the U.S.!)
2) Setting aside data from an authoritative source (NOAA) that contradicted the penny stock website by indicating that there were hurricanes not on the list used by webpennys Message 286 and again Message 17 and again Message 43
3) Falsely claiming that the NOAA list used as a basis for the webpennys article was "the only NOAA frequency trend chart available " when - as had already been shown - it was only an incomplete list of major hurricanes around the U.S. Message 44
Whether the stupidity is in ignoring the existence of the obviously better information that had already been offered, or in thinking that nobody would notice such an obvious falsehood is left to the readers...
And I can find plenty more....
Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 214 by Buzsaw, posted 03-30-2012 8:08 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 328 by Buzsaw, posted 04-04-2012 7:37 AM PaulK has replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 259 of 432 (657786)
03-30-2012 1:18 PM
Reply to: Message 249 by jar
03-30-2012 12:56 PM


Re: Supernatural 101
There is no way to know if what is seen is natural or supernatural.
You don't have to know, you just have to observe, and despite what you know or don't know, you've observed something supernatural, or something that is the result of something supernatural.
I gave some examples of what I see as supernatural influence and interaction above; GOD influencing the doctor to try one more test before giving up diagnosis or GOD influencing someone to pause before stepping into the road and thus avoiding being hit. In such cases the person is unaware of any influence and there is nothing to show there was influence or interaction.
True, but you can observe the doctor trying another test, or see the person pause. You don't know that you've seen anything supernatural, but that doesn't mean you haven't. You can see the effects, without realizing you are. You may have observed 17 supernatural events today without realizing it. You may have even been a participant in one or some of them.
Knowing what you're seeing is not a prerequisite.
I see no way to study the supernatural parts or that we could learn anything about the supernatural from what we can study.
As I said before, seeing the natural effects of a supernatural act can, in principle, tell us that the supernatural act is capable of causing that natural effect.
Now, if you posit that a supernatural being or event is incapable of causing an effect that is obviously strange, then it may be that, despite the fact that it is in prinicple possible, it is not possible in practice.
If you posit that supernatural events or beings can cause a natural event that is obviously strange, then it is quite possible for someone with a supernatural belief to notice that the thing is strange and make the observation, "If that event was caused by a supernatural cause, then we now can say that a supernatural event is capable of causing that effect." This conclusion may be held with very little confidence, scientifically speaking, but it is still a valid observation to make.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 249 by jar, posted 03-30-2012 12:56 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 261 by jar, posted 03-30-2012 1:24 PM Perdition has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


(1)
Message 260 of 432 (657787)
03-30-2012 1:19 PM
Reply to: Message 257 by 1.61803
03-30-2012 1:13 PM


Re: Supernatural 101
Hmmpff, Albert Einstein said that imagination is more important than knowledge.
Albert Einstein would not be famous if experiments had not supported his theories. It was the process of finding out how reality IS that made him famous. With the supernatural we often see the opposite trend, where reality is ignored in favor of imagination.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 257 by 1.61803, posted 03-30-2012 1:13 PM 1.61803 has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 261 of 432 (657788)
03-30-2012 1:24 PM
Reply to: Message 259 by Perdition
03-30-2012 1:18 PM


Re: Supernatural 101
What you haven't shown is how observing the entirely natural results of a supernatural interaction can tell you anything about the supernatural.
I can hold a belief in pennies from heaven but that is all that it is. The penny is still a penny and my finding the penny is still just natural.
The question is "How can the supernatural be studied?" So far no one has shown a way to study that.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 259 by Perdition, posted 03-30-2012 1:18 PM Perdition has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 263 by Perdition, posted 03-30-2012 2:41 PM jar has replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1503 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 262 of 432 (657789)
03-30-2012 1:24 PM
Reply to: Message 253 by Taq
03-30-2012 1:05 PM


Re: Supernatural 101
Beliefs do not reconcile anything. Beliefs are just a wish of how someone wants reality to be.
Perhaps in Tag land.
But without beliefs people would be stuck with having to personally verify everything.

"You were not there for the beginning. You will not be there for the end. Your knowledge of what is going on can only be superficial and relative" William S. Burroughs

This message is a reply to:
 Message 253 by Taq, posted 03-30-2012 1:05 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 264 by Taq, posted 03-30-2012 2:46 PM 1.61803 has replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 263 of 432 (657793)
03-30-2012 2:41 PM
Reply to: Message 261 by jar
03-30-2012 1:24 PM


Supernatural 101 - Back To Basics
Ok, I believe this will be my last substantive post on this topic for a while, since I think what I'm about to say is undebatable, but I could be wrong.
To take this down to its very basics: something happens, let's label it Event A.
When you observe Event A, you are now logically justified, and inassailably correct to state, "Whatever caused Event A is capable of causing Event A."
If anyone disputes this statement, then either they are disagreeing just to disagree, in which case further discussion is unprofitable, or despite appearances, we are speaking different languages, in which case further discussion is impossible.
So, I assume you will agree with the prior statement.
If you do so agree, then the statement is knew knowledge about the cause, namely that it is capable of causing Event A, and this is true no matter the cause.
If the cause is supernatural, and you've asserted that there can be supernatural causes, then you now have new knowledge about something supernatural. You probably won't know it's about anything supernatural, it's trivial knowledge, and not particularly useful, but you didn't say that we were incapable of usefully studying the supernatural, so I feel this proves the point that your blanket statement is wrong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 261 by jar, posted 03-30-2012 1:24 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 265 by jar, posted 03-30-2012 2:51 PM Perdition has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 264 of 432 (657795)
03-30-2012 2:46 PM
Reply to: Message 262 by 1.61803
03-30-2012 1:24 PM


Re: Supernatural 101
Perhaps in Tag land.
It's actually Taq with a Q at the end, as in the shortened version of Thermos aquaticus, a thermophilic bacteria that produces the heat stabile DNA polymerase used in the polymerase chain reaction (PCR). My avatar is the 3D model for the tertiary structure of Taq polymerase (at least I think it is).
But without beliefs people would be stuck with having to personally verify everything.
They wouldn't have to personally verify everything, but is it too much to expect that claims about reality be verified? Beliefs do fit well when discussing ethics and morality since these are things that we can conform to our beliefs. We wish for society to act a certain way and we aim for that goal. Nature is not like that. We can't wish that light would go faster, or that hydrogen nuclei fuses at a much lower temperature to make cold fusion possible. We don't get to choose how nature ought to be. That is why our claims about nature need to be grounded in fact, not beliefs.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 262 by 1.61803, posted 03-30-2012 1:24 PM 1.61803 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 271 by 1.61803, posted 03-30-2012 10:56 PM Taq has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 265 of 432 (657796)
03-30-2012 2:51 PM
Reply to: Message 263 by Perdition
03-30-2012 2:41 PM


Re: Supernatural 101 - Back To Basics
When you observe Event A, you are now logically justified, and inassailably correct to state, "Whatever caused Event A is capable of causing Event A."
You can say that but it has no informational content that I can see.
What is "whatever". Do you know anything about it? Can you say anything about what the cause was? Where is there any new information?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 263 by Perdition, posted 03-30-2012 2:41 PM Perdition has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 267 by Perdition, posted 03-30-2012 2:55 PM jar has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 266 of 432 (657797)
03-30-2012 2:52 PM
Reply to: Message 255 by jar
03-30-2012 1:08 PM


Re: Supernatural 101
Yes, GOD could be doing that and as I have been saying, you couldn't tell.
I think we can both agree that GOD breaks the rule of parsimony, while also agreeing that parsimony is just a guideline and not an edict.
With that said, you are opening the door to a very problematic worldview. Could GOD plant fingerprints at a crime scene when no one is looking in a way that is undetectable? Given the supposed omnipotence of GOD, it would appear so. Should we let criminals out of jail based on this belief? I don't think anyone would suggest that.
The whole thing seems extremely arbitrary to me. It seems to be a projection of how we wish things would be, with a kind deity looking out for us. As you say, we have no way of knowing one way or the other, so the insistence on a kind deity seems to be preference and little else.
Edited by Taq, : No reason given.
Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 255 by jar, posted 03-30-2012 1:08 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 268 by jar, posted 03-30-2012 3:05 PM Taq has replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 267 of 432 (657798)
03-30-2012 2:55 PM
Reply to: Message 265 by jar
03-30-2012 2:51 PM


Re: Supernatural 101 - Back To Basics
You can say that but it has no informational content that I can see.
It has trivial information content, but it is new information.
What is "whatever".
The cause.
Do you know anything about it?
I know that it can cause Event A.
Can you say anything about what the cause was?
Why should I have to? You didn't specify what type of information you could or couldn't study about the supernatural, you said you can't study anything about the supernatural. This is a trivial, but no less correct, counter to that absolute claim.
Where is there any new information?
You didn't know Event A could be caused by the cause, now you do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 265 by jar, posted 03-30-2012 2:51 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 269 by jar, posted 03-30-2012 3:06 PM Perdition has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 268 of 432 (657801)
03-30-2012 3:05 PM
Reply to: Message 266 by Taq
03-30-2012 2:52 PM


Re: Supernatural 101
Yes, my belief is simply my belief and should never interfere or influence science or statements of testable knowledge.
How am I opening the door to a very problematic worldview?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 266 by Taq, posted 03-30-2012 2:52 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 275 by Taq, posted 04-03-2012 11:17 AM jar has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 269 of 432 (657802)
03-30-2012 3:06 PM
Reply to: Message 267 by Perdition
03-30-2012 2:55 PM


Re: Supernatural 101 - Back To Basics
Word salad.
Sorry but I knew that the cause of something can cause that thing.
No new information.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 267 by Perdition, posted 03-30-2012 2:55 PM Perdition has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 270 by Perdition, posted 03-30-2012 3:53 PM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 270 of 432 (657806)
03-30-2012 3:53 PM
Reply to: Message 269 by jar
03-30-2012 3:06 PM


Re: Supernatural 101 - Back To Basics
Sorry but I knew that the cause of something can cause that thing.
That's a general truth, but you don't necessarily know the specific truth.
For instance, based on your above statement, you could say that you know that the cause of the Titanic not sinking at 2:20 AM on April 15, 1912 was capable of causing the Titanic not to sink at 2:20 AM on April 15, 1912. But that statement would not be true, as the Titanic did sink at 2:20 AM on April 15, 1912.
So, the truth of the statement "The cause of Event A is capable of causing Event A" is only true in the case that Event A happens. So, Event A happens, the statement becomes truth, you now know it to be true, your knowledge has increased.
Again, I concede that this knowledge is trivial and not useful, but it is true. I also think you can build from this to greater truths, but until you are willing to accept that this is true, even trivially true, then we're at an impasse.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 269 by jar, posted 03-30-2012 3:06 PM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024