Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The "science" of Miracles
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 302 of 696 (826460)
01-02-2018 10:57 AM
Reply to: Message 297 by Percy
12-30-2017 12:59 PM


Re: Definition Of Terms
Phat writes:
... your reply does reemphasize how strongly you put your faith in humanity.
When I cross a bridge, I put faith in the bridge. Even if it's pretty rickety, it's the only way across. I wouldn't call that a "strong" faith.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 297 by Percy, posted 12-30-2017 12:59 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 314 by Percy, posted 01-02-2018 2:19 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 303 of 696 (826461)
01-02-2018 11:01 AM
Reply to: Message 298 by Percy
12-30-2017 1:07 PM


Re: Definition Of Terms
Percy writes:
Just as we might say, "At present it sure looks like we understand the basics of electricity," were a miracle (event not explicable by natural or scientific laws) to happen we might say, "At present it sure looks like miracles can happen."
If something we can't explain does happen, we don't say, "At present it sure looks like miracles can happen." We say, "I wonder how that happened." That's how science begins.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 298 by Percy, posted 12-30-2017 1:07 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 304 by ICANT, posted 01-02-2018 11:34 AM ringo has replied
 Message 306 by Phat, posted 01-02-2018 11:47 AM ringo has replied
 Message 315 by Percy, posted 01-02-2018 2:58 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 305 of 696 (826464)
01-02-2018 11:39 AM
Reply to: Message 304 by ICANT
01-02-2018 11:34 AM


Re: Definition Of Terms
ICANT writes:
And when there is no physical answer, "Then What"?
Keep looking.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 304 by ICANT, posted 01-02-2018 11:34 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 311 by ICANT, posted 01-02-2018 1:31 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 308 of 696 (826470)
01-02-2018 12:25 PM
Reply to: Message 306 by Phat
01-02-2018 11:47 AM


Re: Definition Of Terms
Phat writes:
So, in essence, you are saying "I can't explain it!" I wonder how I can explain it?
Yes.
Phat writes:
How long do you plan on wondering before you conclude anything? Your entire life?
Yes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 306 by Phat, posted 01-02-2018 11:47 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 309 by Phat, posted 01-02-2018 12:32 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 323 of 696 (826525)
01-03-2018 2:17 PM
Reply to: Message 310 by ICANT
01-02-2018 1:25 PM


ICANT writes:
The incident was seen as a miracle in Peru.
Yes, "seen as a miracle" is exactly the point I'm trying to make. Jesus' face on a taco is also "seen as a miracle" but what "miracle" actually happened? The story also reinforces my point that there doesn't have to be any breaking of the laws of nature for it to be called a miracle.
ICANT writes:
There are many other fantastic stories such as the one above.
Yes, indeed. Incidents attributed to "miracles" are pretty common.
By the way, you know what "fantastic" means, don't you? Many stories of miracles are fanciful, imaginative, embellished, etc.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 310 by ICANT, posted 01-02-2018 1:25 PM ICANT has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 324 of 696 (826526)
01-03-2018 2:20 PM
Reply to: Message 311 by ICANT
01-02-2018 1:31 PM


Re: Definition Of Terms
ICANT writes:
When you have exhausted all avenues and there is no physical answer to say just keep looking when there is nothing to look for is like sticking your head in the sand and saying I know what I believe so don't bother me with the facts.
No, it's like science. Science is an ongoing process. It's a loop that justs keeps on looking. You could say that there's an escape hatch for, "We've got a pretty good answer so we can devote our time to something else for the moment." But there's no escape hatch for, "We can't figure it out so we'll stop trying."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 311 by ICANT, posted 01-02-2018 1:31 PM ICANT has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 326 of 696 (826528)
01-03-2018 2:34 PM
Reply to: Message 313 by Percy
01-02-2018 2:14 PM


Percy writes:
When the George Washington Bridge moves 50 miles up the Hudson, analysis could conclude miracle with perfect scientific validity since the conclusion is tentative.
You're kidding, right? Do you seriously think science would conclude a miracle?
Percy writes:
Tangle and are in agreement on this.
So Tangle and [nobody] are in agreement on this?
Percy writes:
I would never say "can't be explained by natural causes" because some people might think that synonymous with "can be explained by supernatural causes."
But you did say, "... a miracle is not explicable by natural or scientific laws...." in Message 296. What's the difference between, "can't be explained by natural causes," and, "not explicable by natural or scientific laws"?
Percy writes:
It goes back to when we were asking whether you'd be willing to discuss miracles hypothetically, or whether you'd insist on ruling them out out of hand.
There's a difference between a hypothetical discussion of whether or not miracles are possible and making up a hypothetical miracle to discuss. In science, the only thing that's hypothetical is the hypothesis. You don't get to make up the evidence.
As I've said, the first step in the scientific study of a flying bridge is to find out if the reports are true. Since they're not, there's no reason to continue with it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 313 by Percy, posted 01-02-2018 2:14 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 331 by Percy, posted 01-03-2018 4:42 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 327 of 696 (826529)
01-03-2018 2:38 PM
Reply to: Message 314 by Percy
01-02-2018 2:19 PM


Re: Definition Of Terms
Percy writes:
... your reply reemphasizes how strongly you put your faith in humanity, and that from Phat's perspective it's all still religion, but with faith in humanity instead of God.
If Phat wants to call "faith" in the only available option a "religion", he's welcome to.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 314 by Percy, posted 01-02-2018 2:19 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 329 of 696 (826531)
01-03-2018 2:42 PM
Reply to: Message 315 by Percy
01-02-2018 2:58 PM


Re: Definition Of Terms
Percy writes:
Tangle and I have presented examples that are not explicable by currently understood natural or scientific laws.
You've made up examples that have nothing to do with miracles. Those events did not happen. That's where the scientific investigation ends.
Miracles are events that are attributed to supernatural causes, such as healings, faces on tacos, etc. The topic is miracles, not fiction. Why can't you talk about real events that are actually called miracles?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 315 by Percy, posted 01-02-2018 2:58 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 335 of 696 (826586)
01-04-2018 2:03 PM
Reply to: Message 331 by Percy
01-03-2018 4:42 PM


Percy writes:
It's inexplicable by natural and scientific laws, and that's the definition of a miracle.
No, that is not the definition of a miracle. Only the person who attributes the event to supernatural power is unable to explain it.
Percy writes:
The difference is the word "causes".
I don't see any difference. The "laws" are just a description of the causes.
Percy writes:
Hypothetically, how would science respond were an unambiguous miracle to happen, such as the George Washington Bridge moving 50 miles up the Hudson.
As I've already said, science would not consider it an "unambiguous miracle". The first question science would ask is, "Did it actually happen?" It's easily tested. Is the GW Bridge still where it's always been? Yes. Is it where you claim it is? No. Your "miracle" is doubly falsified.
Percy writes:
We can't talk about real miracles from a scientific perspective because there has never been a scientifically verified miracle.
We certainly can talk about claimed miracles. There are plenty of them. You don't have to make up phoney ones to try to prop up an erroneous definition.
Percy writes:
We're asking what would it mean if a scientifically verified miracle *did* occur.
That's a nonsensical question. Science can not verify miracles. If science can verify it, it's not a miracle.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 331 by Percy, posted 01-03-2018 4:42 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 340 by Percy, posted 01-05-2018 12:20 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 347 of 696 (826696)
01-07-2018 2:23 PM
Reply to: Message 340 by Percy
01-05-2018 12:20 PM


Percy writes:
And it does say "may be attributed," so attribution isn't a necessity.
There are various things to which it may be attributed. It doesn't say attribution isn't necessary.
Look at the real reports of miracles. The events are inexplicable by the people who think it's a miracle. Pareidolia, for one example, is by no means inexplicable, so inexplicable is the part that is not necessary.
Percy writes:
But, hypothetically, how would science respond if tomorrow the George Washington Bridge moved 50 miles up the Hudson in the way I've described earlier: gently letting loose from its moorings, floating up into the air, moving 50 miles upriver, and settling back down to the ground near West Point.
You're playing fast and loose with the word "hypothetical". If it can't be tested, it isn't a hypothesis. It's just a silly fantasy.
Percy writes:
But the title of this thread is The "science" of Miracles, not "claimed miracles."
All miracles are claimed miracles, just like all Bigfoot sightings are claimed sightings. It's the claims that can be scientifically studied.
Percy writes:
... if you know of miracles that have the potential to be scientifically studied then we could look at those, too.
Just Google "Jesus' face on a taco". We've been there and done that. It's the claims that can be scientifically studied.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 340 by Percy, posted 01-05-2018 12:20 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 348 by Phat, posted 01-07-2018 2:55 PM ringo has replied
 Message 349 by Phat, posted 01-07-2018 3:07 PM ringo has replied
 Message 352 by Percy, posted 01-07-2018 4:07 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 350 of 696 (826703)
01-07-2018 3:19 PM
Reply to: Message 348 by Phat
01-07-2018 2:55 PM


Re: When Bridges Can Fly
Phat writes:
Assuming all of that had been carried out and was inconclusive, we then would have a hypothesis.
What hypothesis?
Phat writes:
Percy may be arguing that the resulting hypothesis could tentatively be described as miraculous.
If the result was inconclusive, then science would describe it as inconclusive.
Phat writes:
Different people would attach different labels to the event. Not everyone would call it a miracle.
That's exactly my point. A miracle is what somebody thinks is inexplicable. As soon as objectivity is introduced, the whole concept of "miracle" disappears.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 348 by Phat, posted 01-07-2018 2:55 PM Phat has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 351 of 696 (826704)
01-07-2018 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 349 by Phat
01-07-2018 3:07 PM


Re: If You Had Been Saul
Phat writes:
Assume that you were Saul. You suddenly became blind. You had been persecuting certain people for whatever reason before this happened, but unlike Saul you were not a religiously inclined thinker. What would be your conclusions?
Again, you're talking about subjective conclusions. That has nothing to do with science.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 349 by Phat, posted 01-07-2018 3:07 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 353 by Phat, posted 01-08-2018 1:22 AM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 355 of 696 (826713)
01-08-2018 10:54 AM
Reply to: Message 352 by Percy
01-07-2018 4:07 PM


Percy writes:
Actually it does say that attribution isn't necessary. That's what the word "may" means, a possibility, not a necessity.
What it says is:
quote:
Such an event may be attributed to a supernatural being (a deity), magic, a miracle worker, a saint or a religious leader.
The word "may" means that it may be one of the following list. It does not say "may or may not be".
Percy writes:
So rephrasing, let us consider the possibility that tomorrow the George Washington Bridge moves 50 miles up the Hudson in the way I described earlier. How would science respond?
I've already answered that several times. Science would look at all of the evidence and if it was inconclusive, they would call it inconclusive. At no time would science ever consider it a "miracle".
Percy writes:
But nobody here believes those are miracles.
ICANT told the story of the girl who escaped the plane crach as if he believed it was a miracle.
Percy writes:
They're just "claimed miracles" of the religiously credulous.
All miracles are just claimed miracles.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 352 by Percy, posted 01-07-2018 4:07 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 357 by Percy, posted 01-08-2018 11:23 AM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 356 of 696 (826714)
01-08-2018 10:58 AM
Reply to: Message 353 by Phat
01-08-2018 1:22 AM


Re: If You Had Been Saul
Phat writes:
You cant hope to study everything that ever happens with evidence-based experiments.
Name one claimed miracle that could not be studied with evidence-based experiments.
Phat writes:
how do you think they profile certain people at the FBI?
By looking at the evidence.
Phat writes:
Subjectivity is very human and quite common.
And science requires getting rid of it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 353 by Phat, posted 01-08-2018 1:22 AM Phat 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