The more I think about it, the less the term supernatural makes any sense. So, can anyone give me a definition of it that does not require natural premises? Also, what makes it outside nature?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
About Me
- Billy
- Atheist until such times as someone produces some real evidence that does not constitute wishful thinking, lying or recycled mythology.
Web sites of interest
- Brushwoodthicket
- Cinders In Spain
- Debunking Christianity
- Every Day Brightness
- Harmonious Dissonance
- Humanity's Great New Era
- Just Say Know
- Ken Miller's Evolution Page
- Loose Tongue
- Love of Scotland
- Musings of a strange mind
- My Climbing photos
- Pharyngula
- Rhetorical Rants from Epsilon Reticuli
- Richarddawkins.net
- Sand Walk
- Stephen Law
- Surely You're Joking
- Talk Origins
- Tea Fuelled Madness
- The Bald Black Hole
- The freethought cafe
- The life and lies of Anna Banana
- The Panda's Thumb
- The Strawman Cometh
- The Tufted Titmouse
- Trig Point
- True Bible Knowledge
- Xzanron
- Zarbi
Followers
Recent Comments
Blog Archive
Labels
- Abiogenesis (1)
- Adaptation (2)
- Astronomy (5)
- Atheism (5)
- Atheist action (2)
- Behaviour (1)
- Bible (17)
- Book Club (4)
- Books (1)
- Christianity (7)
- Climbing (10)
- Creationism (14)
- Creationist lies (7)
- Criticism (1)
- Dangerous Fundamentalism (6)
- Dinosaurs (3)
- Dr Who (2)
- Ethology (1)
- Evidence (3)
- Evil Bible Verses (1)
- Evolution (32)
- Faith (2)
- Family (1)
- Fish (2)
- Flood (1)
- Fundie Nut Bags (7)
- Genetics (2)
- Geology (2)
- Humour (29)
- Intelligent Design (2)
- Letters (4)
- Medicine (2)
- Miracles (2)
- Morality (18)
- Music (11)
- News (2)
- Other Stuff (5)
- Paleontology (7)
- Parasites (5)
- Petition (1)
- Philosophy (16)
- Physics (4)
- Pictures (1)
- Prayer (2)
- Prophecy (6)
- Quotes (3)
- Rant (4)
- Religion (6)
- Religious absurdity (15)
- Religious Wingnuttery (10)
- Remembrance (3)
- sarcasm (1)
- Scepticism (1)
- Science (3)
- Superstition (1)
- Theology (6)
- Transitional fossils (3)
- Wishful thinking (5)
- Zoology (5)
Viewer map
FEEDJIT Live Traffic Map
Revolver Maps
10 comments:
From what I undertand....
God is usually conceived as being Pure Being, Pure actuality.... having no potentiality because all potentials are already actualized.
Then there's also the matter of extension. Physical things are basically extended things. Non-material things are non-extended things. Perhaps some medieval or early modern philosophy would help....
But I really suck at it since I'm so stuck in empiricism.
Yeah.... I'm not so good at metaphysics. I'm more interested in epistemology and ethics.
I quite like the definition from Richard Carrier:
http://richardcarrier.blogspot.com/search/label/supernatural
...which amounts to:
The supernatural is the ability of anything to exist, act, communicate or otherwise influence the world without any physical basis or means.
This avoids the usual nonsense (adopted by many) about the supernatural being what cannot be tested, or what is beyond science, which defines away any chance of it being a *meaningful* definition, IMO.
Billy,
I tend, rather strongly, towards the view that the term "supernatural" is utterly meaningless.
If something can (and does) influence the "natural" world, (as theists of whatever stripe are apt to claim) then it's (whatever it is) "natural". If it doesn't, then it doesn't exist. (So there!)
I must admit, I've not read the Richard Carrier thing that Other Mark mentions -- it's sounds interesting, although my initial "thought" is that something something that can "communicate with" or "influence" the (natural) world must surely be 'natural?'
Mark_W
Good grief, liquid Sunday lunch, isn't it?
"Something something" should just be one "something" in fact.
Thanks for the comments guys, I'm a bit busy just now, I'll be back later
So, can anyone give me a definition of it that does not require natural premises?
Nope... I cannot.
Ignoring the silly idea of God for a moment.
Ghosts... they would be supernatural by anyone’s definition I think.
Let us just suppose, by some crazy (and unknown means) that not only do ghosts exist – but they have been measured/observed in the science lab by some mad (but reliable) physics professor.
Now here is the problem for the supernaturalist...
Once ghosts have been observed using good old scientific methods would ghosts then not be something natural, but not yet explained?
In conclusion.
I am not sure the supernatural can exist in any meaningful sense – any more than the non-existent can exist. It is a contradiction.
There are loads of stuff in physics that cannot yet be explained (take dark matter for example) but no one would claim ‘dark matter’ was supernatural in anyway.
Would they?
Lee
Hi Mark,
Oops, I just said what you said.
Well done that liquid lunch sir
I knew I should have read the comments before writing
Lee
Lee,
No worries, Sir -- you are, I'd aver, cleverer than me, so if, or whenever, you say the same thing independently of me, my thought is: "Well done me, and hoorah for that!"
[And we're both right, to be fair to us! :-)]
Mark_W
Hi Mark,
I don't think I am smarter than anyone here... or there
However thanks all the same, and well done us both.
Lee
PS
Today's word verification "juplians"
Are those want we call aliens from Jupiter?
Not sure you should be worrying.
Post a Comment