Supernaturalism and reason.

by Narkissos 36 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  R.Crusoe

  I will not think anything to be supernatural that does not have an explanation except ,despite my age, I still get an overwhelming sense of wanting to be in a different position than the one I'm in when a female with the best ass of my dreams passes by and I feel things which I cannot explain and want to be in her dimension without ever having a chance!

  To me that is supernatural - that something I know will feel better than I have ever felt even though I never felt it yet!

  The thing that exists even though it never has!

  And the only proof that my reasoning is flawed will be if someone feels intrigued enough to set up the experiment for me and I, being so scientifically inquisitive, will offer my time with no fee!

  You can't say fairer than that!
• 

  hillary_step

  Burn,

  Who argues that he does such a thing?

  That is not the point, but why should it not surprise me that you missed it?

  Gopher saw the point, ( "Yes, indeed. The humor was to illustrate a point" ) if you need further information, pleae direct your posts to him. He may have the patience to explain that I do not.

  HS
• 

  hillary_step

  Robinson Crusoe,

  I will not think anything to be supernatural that does not have an explanation except ,despite my age, I still get an overwhelming sense of wanting to be in a different position than the one I'm in when a female with the best ass of my dreams passes by and I feel things which I cannot explain and want to be in her dimension without ever having a chance!

  To me that is supernatural - that something I know will feel better than I have ever felt even though I never felt it yet!

  On the contrary, that is the least supernatural thing in human expereince.

  HS
• 

  R.Crusoe

  If a female ever lets me into her dimension I will attempt reach her infinity and beyond but cant make any advance promises!

  My name isn't Buzz, what's yours?
• 

  Narkissos

  Thank you all for your replies -- and especially quietlyleaving and hillary step for getting and illustrating the point I was trying to make.

  What strikes me is the epistemological inconsistency of believers in the "supernatural," who daily use their "natural reason" and assess a lot of things (including in religion) as "more or less likely" just like anyone else, as if there were no supernatural at all -- because once the "supernatural" is taken into account there is strictly no account and no criterium of assessment left. They only resort to the "supernatural" exceptionally, like a sort of logical magic wand, wishfully thinking they can lock it away again when they don't need it anymore. But once the "supernatural" is out, how can it ever be dismissed?

  From this perspective the "supernatural" is indeed, I think, the end of any reason. But of course that in no way proves it doesn't exist. Doubt about its possibility may be a disturbing yet healthy limit to trust in reason. But positive belief in its actuality directly leads to rational self-contradiction.
• 

  nicolaou

  Good topic Nark!

  A supernatural explanation is never a reasonable one. Please think about your definitions of 'supernatural' and 'reason' if you're inclined to feign offence at that.

  Ross: Nothing is impossible, nothing is certain.

  It is impossible for a man to walk on water. That is a cast iron certainty.

  "Life is a journey... might as well be pleasant to the other travellers, as it goes a lot slower when everyone is grumpy!"
• 

  quietlyleaving

  hmm nic

  It is impossible for a man to walk on water. That is a cast iron certainty

  
• 

  Jeffro

  It is impossible for a man to walk on water. That is a cast iron certainty .

  Does ice skating count as walking?
• 

  Jeffro

  The world of the supernatural is a fiction. If the real world actually functioned on the basis of spirits, astrology, positive thoughts, and so on, the world would be a very different place. There would be no point in science, as results, at the whim of whatever spectre or jabberwocky were affecting them would not be consistent or predictable. Yes, there are things that are unknown, and some things might never be fully understood. But it is observable that as knowledge grows, and the number of unknowns reduces, the supernatural things that were once viewed as commonplace - and were proffered as the only explanations for all manner of occurance - are pushed into an ever-shrinking corner.
• 

  Narkissos

  Jeffro,

  Or we must think of "God" along the lines of Descartes' mischevious demon, designing both "nature" and "reason" in such a way that would lead us to increasingly rule out the "supernatural"...

  Thanks nic for reviving this thread and everybody else for contributing. I'm still a bit surprised that no attempt at rebuttal came from those who claim to reconcile supernaturalism and reason (in a neo-thomist or neo-calvinist way for instance).