Do we have evidence against the supernatural?

I've read through some of the posts and it seems to be spiraling in a hundred different directions at once.Perhaps I am wrong here, but as I understand it, you are asking basically -"Is there any evidence for things that are supernatural in nature?"But if that's what you're asking, it's a self destructive question.If we had evidence for something supernatural, that evidence would have to be natural (ie we see it, we touch it, we measure it). If we have natural evidence for something, then the thing that we have evidence for is itself natural. So the presence of evidence would disqualify something as being supernatural.We can have belief in something which is supernatural. We can have theories about something which is supernatural. We can have faith in it, or ideas about it, or reasoning behind it, etc. But these things are not evidence.The opposite question - "Do we have evidence against something supernatural?" Has the same flaw, plus another one.You are asking us to prove the negative. That's nearly impossible. For example, "do we have evidence against Bigfoot?" What would evidence against bigfoot be? We'd have to clearcut the entire pacific northwest and go inch by inch checking under rocks to prove that it wasn't there.This message has been edited by Nuggin, 10-03-2005 01:17 PM

I assume you misread me. This is what you would do the prove bigfoot / God / whatever.I'm pointing out that it's nearly impossible to DISprove Bigfoot / God / whatever.You can argue that it is unlikely, that it's illogical, that's there's no evidence for, but in order to disprove something we don't know exists, you'ld have to go to extreme lengths.Do we have evidence against the supernatural? No.
Do we have evidence FOR the supernatural? No.

Only if it remains beyond the physical laws.For example - Telepathy, the ability to read someone's mind.Currently, we'd classify telepathy as supernatural. However, let's say that we could prove that it happens. We have a test subject that can be shown to demonstrate this skill. We study this person, and discover "ESP rays" emitting from an unmapped part of the brain. We find others with similiar rays, train them and they too develop telepathy.Telepathy has not changed, but our understanding of it has. Telepathy ceases to be supernatural and becomes natural.Just as lightning was once caused only by God's wrath and now is caused by storms, so too will many of the "supernatural" things around us become natural with better understanding.Now, there exists a subcatagory of supernatural things which will never become natural. These would be the supernatural things which don't really exist - "Pink Unicorns".

This is a good question. I would say that the "belief in pink unicorns" is natural, but that pink unicorns themselves are supernatural, or extranatural, or unnatural.The secondary question here - would "pink unicorns" be supernatural if no one had imagined them? Makes my brain hurt

Makes good sense to me. Nicely put