Has The Supernatural Hypothesis Failed?

That's the issue though, buz. To you quantum mechanics looks mysterious, but not to quantum physicist who understand it as well as you understand the workings of a care engine.You don't require god or a supernatural force to make your car go, because you understand it. It's not that complex to you. This is the same as when a quatum physicist looks at QM; they don't require a god or supernatural force because they understand it. It's not that complex to them. There is a long history of science replacing supernatural intervention with natural causes, all of your work is still ahead of you.- Oni

I agree, but this by-passes my point.Those questions raised based on experience ONLY should then be investigated without a positive or negative assumtion - or rather, without a possible or impossible conclusion - it should be investigated with a neutral stance.That is different from a concept derived from empirical evidence, where a possible or impossible position can justifiably be given. In those cases, and in those cases only, can we say "Until we know that something is impossible how can we consider it to be anything other than a possibility."When it comes to questions about god, supernatural or even magic, I'm not saying it's possible or impossible, I'm saying the experience itself is not yet established as representing an actual phenomenon in reality.Going back to Jesus, the question isn't whether or not what he did should be considered natural or supernatural, the question is, Did he do something at all? Is there an actual phenomenon to investigate, or are these just stories?I fear we'll still have that hair splitting difference, so if you'd like to reply that's cool, but I won't be offended if you don't. - Oni

Absolutely. I guess I just take the position of neutrality (if I could use that word in this instance) - I neither consider it possible or impossible, I consider the whole affair lacking of enough critical evidence to make any decision one way or the other.If however, the supernatural was evidenced in some way - for example, physicist telling us that structures can form which aren't bound to or derived from natural law - then anecdotes which require someone to have supernatural powers can be possible.Until then it doesn't make sense to weigh in on the matter one way or the other. Agreed, that in the absence of knowledge that something is impossible it remains a possibility. But the question is, do we actually have a "something" to consider, or just words?I question the concept and whether or not someone actually has one, not the possibility or impossibility of it's existence. That's why I dismiss "supernatural" and "god" as nothing really, because what is it aside from words? Are they actual concepts?I honestly cannot process the image or meaning of these words having never consciously seen it.- OniEdited by onifre, : No reason given.Edited by onifre, : No reason given.Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

Can you explain what supernatural means? And perhaps give an example of something supernatural?Maybe natural methodologies can explain it and the word "super" can be removed. So just one example will work.- Oni

So you're saying that we have to accept claims made by humans that a phenomenon is actually supernatural and that no method exists to explain it? We simply have to accept this claim at face value? Is that what you're saying?How do you know anything is beyond the realm of nature? Are you accepting these claims without proper investigation?Why do science at all then? Just claim everything is beyond the realm of science and that's it, we've placed it outside of any known methods of invistigations. Pack your books, class is over kids.- Oni

Well then can you explain, because this: Is you claiming that a phenomenon is beyond the realm of nature and thus beyond the realm of science.If so, how do you know that? It was no accident, that is exactly what I thought you said, that's why I asked if that's what you meant.- OniEdited by onifre, : No reason given.

And what does that mean? Where is the line where nature stops and "beyond" begins? You mean Thor the fictional, made up character of mythology is an example of something supernatural?So then so would superman?- OniEdited by onifre, : No reason given.Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

So on the tip of your dick?- Oni

Oh I'm sorry, you must be under the impression that I care that you think these conversations are pointless.Maybe I can interest you in some youtube videos of people getting kicked in the balls so your time is spent less wastefully?- Oni

Yo wud up biatch, where you been?Just to stay on topic, Mass density.- Oni

It's not me it's the brit I tell 'ya! Don't be jealous that I've been chatting online with babes all day.- Oni

Why not? Then be entertained, what do you want from me? I asked Jon to clarify his position because I wasn't following it, you chiimed in with something about a pinhead. I figured you were fucking around, so I fucked around back. What's with the sensitivity? Most of you're post, especially in this thread, are sarcastic comments with not much substance, why get on me for doing the same shit?Now, if you actually want to debate it, cool. Can you give an example of what "anything else" is? Because what you're doing is putting an arbitrary line on existence and the universe and making the claim as though this were a fact.The observable universe is all we know of, beyond the observable universe is not only unknown, but more than likely unknowable. So how can you say there is a boundary to something that you can't even see, don't know anything about, and probably will never know anything about? Oh most definitely, a huge ass. But it's par for the course it seems when debating you. Which is ok too. Yeah right...- Oni

Shouldn't that read "the concept/s of god/s remain a possibility"...?For two reasons:1) "god" doesn't represent any one thing; it can be lots of things and has been throughout history - For example, anyone claiming "god" is the sun has evidence to support the existence of the sun. If that's their concept of god, there is no issue.2) The issue is more with the concepts than with an actual "god" type thing. We haven't gone past stage one, which is trying to understand the many concepts of god/s. Here is where the issue starts and ends, at the concepts. Humans are attributing all kinds of unknowable, unevidenced features and qualities to their concepts and that's where problems are. Can there exist something that can be refered to as a god? Sure, there could be many things that could be called god, or there could be a yet unknown force that can be called god. But what's all the other stuff about "outside the universe" and "outside of reality"? What are all these claims that things can break the laws of nature? What is this talk about something being derived from and not subject to the fundamental laws of physics? That's when the concepts take on a more fictional role. That's when the concepts become saturated in nonsensical terms.So I would say that God doesn't remain a possibility, because that word doesn't represent any one thing. When someone can say god is love, or god is energy, or god is light, or god is Christ, or god is Allah, which one do you pick as the actual representative? Which one concept is possible and which one isn't? Or are they all possible?- Oni

Cool, we got that out of the way. Not really though. Humans make the claim that their concept of god makes claims about the real word. There in lies the rub, "god" has said nothing at all. Here's what you're saying: X as the creator of the universe has not been falsified.Can you see how that becomes a rather insignificant statement? Sure it does, it represents fictional characters that within the world of non-fiction make sense. No not meaningless, in this particular case, but surely ambiguous to say the least. And frankly, how can the concepts be specific if, like you agreed, god means many things to many people. You have to admit, there is a vast difference conceptually between "God is the sun" and "God is an energy that exists outside of reality," no? These are human concepts, Straggler. Nothing more really. You didn't have to stop there, you could go on to say, the sun is god. Fire is god. Wind is god. Love is god. An extra-terrestrial being with super intelligence is god. Where does it end?- Oni

What does that even mean?The statement: God exists outside of the universe.Is not a supernatural claim, it's just a claim. The person saying it has no idea what they're saying, they've never known anything to be outside of the universe, they don't even know that there is an outside of the universe (if that even makes sense), there is no evidence for the universe having a limit... so what if anything is a supernatural claim?- OniEdited by onifre, : No reason given.