Summations Only

What sort of supernatural penomena do you think we should study?I think you should have a read of this thread: Studying the supernaturalThe OP summarises some of the key problems with your desire.

A ghost? A leprechaun? A werewolf? A poltergeist? The parting of the red sea? It depends on the entity or phenomenon in question. Obviously. Well "unknown" means....unknown. Whilst "supernatural" means that it is inherently beyond natural explanation in some sense. For example some UFO sighting might be classified as "unknown" without being deemed supernatural at all. Also there are many who claim to know a great deal about the supernatural (e.g. mediums). So the two words are not synonyms as you seem to be implying. By looking at something supernatural which actually exists. It is the actually existing part that seems to be the main problem here.....

But what is it that stops us studying it in either case? It is you who is claiming that supernatural entities and phenomena cannot be investigated. How do you know this? The fact that they are defined as being inherently unable to be explained by natural causes because they are magical or fantastical or divine or whatever it is that people believe about them.The fact that people have been consistently wrong about this doesn't mean that "unknown" and "supernatural" are synonyms as you continue to imply.It just means people have been consistently wrong in attributing supernatural causes.

Yet there are lots of things which are still unknown. So "unknown" and "supernatural" cannot mean the same thing can they? Most of the things once thought to be supernatural have been found not to be. Furthermore to the best of our scientific knowledge the whole idea of the the supernatural is a human construction. The same way we study anything else. Scientifically. The fact that science wouldn't be able to explain it doesn't mean it couldn't be investigated using the scientific method to see if is real rather than a trick (for example) does it? But what is it that you thinks means that tests and investigations cannot be undertaken?If magical Leprechauns actually existed we could scientifically test them couldn't we? Their magical abilities (teleportation, wish granting, etc. etc.) if genuinely supernatural would defy natural explanation and scientific understanding but that wouldn't stop us undertaking scientific investigations on these entities and their abilities would it?

We can scientifically investigate anything which is real and detectable can't we? But that in itself doesn't stop us investigating magical leprechauns does it? Do you now accept that, if it exists and is detectable, then it can be scientifically investigated whether supernatural or not? Concluding and investigating are not the same thing.Do you think "unknown" and "supernatural" are synonyms?If not what do you think the difference is between these two terms?
If yes - How can there be things which are unknown but not supernatural?

Right. Things like the hypothetical genuinely magical leprechauns we have been discussing. They would qualify as "supernatural" because they are genuinely magical and thus not limited to natural causes. But do you accept that simply being supernatural doesn't preclude something from being investigated by applying the scientific method?

In what sense "beyond"....?Being inherently beyond scientific/naturalistic understanding doesn't necessarily make something beyond scientific investigation does it?Because science can investigate anything which is real and detectable can't it?

If the actual cause of magical leprechauns is magical rather than natural how can they not be supernatural? What definition?

So can you explain how genuinely magical Leprechauns don't qualify? You are still conflating conclusions with investigations. That something is supernatural/magical isn't necessarily a barrier to investigating or studying it is it?

Good. So are you claiming that supernatural things are simply unable to be detetected by definition? If it is undetetable how can it ever be detected and how can anyone ever claim to have any inkling of it's existence?Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

So can you explain how genuinely magical Leprechauns don't qualify? You are still conflating conclusions with investigations. That something is supernatural/magical isn't necessarily a barrier to investigating or studying it is it? Why do we need to know in order to decide whether or not they are able to be investigated using the scientific method? Why does it matter? If they are observable they can be studied can't they?

I agree with all of that. But still there is no need to conflate scientific explanations with scientific investigations. If (to use the same example as above) genuinely magical leprechauns exist and are observable we will never scientifically understand them (because they are genuinely magical) but that doesn't stop us putting them in a lab and investigating their abilities. But it is the cause that is invariably cited as being supernatural. Storms are observable phenomenon. But Thor remains a supernatural entity no matter how much scientific knowledge we might acquire about storms.It's just that increased understanding of storms leads to increased doubt about Thor as the cause of such things.....

Quite. Studying and explaining are not the same thing. Which is why it is stupid to just assert that we cannot study supernatural phenomena unless it is also being asserted that supernatural phenomena are undetectable for some reason. Yes - If a scientific explanation can be found then it will be a naturalistic one. True.

I don't mean just "observe". I mean investigate. I mean scientifically study.We scientifically study lots of things that we haven't yet explained. Obvioulsy.Jar has asserted that we can't study that which is supernatural and is now just being an evasive twit in that way that he does so effectively when caught out.

You don't need to identify it as such first in order to study a genuinely magical leprechaun in the unlikely event that such a thing actually exists.Likewise any other detectable phenomenon or entity. If the supernatural phenomenon or entity in question is observable - Why not?