Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 48
  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Within view of Wrigley Field
    Posts
    346
    Post Thanks / Like

    Why believe in the Supernatural?

    I believe that science offers the best means of understanding the world and the universe we exist in.
    I also believe that Science cannot tell us how to live as Humans and have happy, profitable lives. Science is a tool, not a mind set.

    We have scientific theories that are unproven, but are still acceptable (logical) as theories.

    We also have beliefs that cannot be supported by science at all. That which is "supernatural" exists outside the laws of "nature", thereby outside the realm of science.

    Flying pigs, flying witches on broomsticks, miraculous appearances on hospital windows, ghosts, alien abductions, astrology, speaking with the "dead", prophecies, the "Wiggles", etc.

    When faced with the cold rigid reality of Science, is it normal for Humans to need a belief in the supernatural just to get through life?

  2. #2
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Here and Now
    Posts
    3,530
    Post Thanks / Like
    On one end of a personal construct is Nothing. On the other end is Everything. Once there was no human life. Nothing. Now there is Something because we're here. But we all know we don't have Everything. Science strives to invent new things and answer old questions. Religion works to fill voids in people who feel something is lacking. Drugs work the same way. Therefore, we'd have to summize that we don't have Everything.

    What that means is that Everything lies beyond our comprehension.

    So, we humans who want Everything, but are only Something, strive to figure out ways to get Everything. We do science, we do religion, we do spirituality, etc...because we can't really know the "right" way to get Everything since it lies beyond our comprehension. Some people are content living their life not striving for Everything. They are content with Something. But here is why that behavior is self-destructive.

    Humanity is constantly striving to move forward in some way. In this world, time and space are designed to be incremental. It moves forward. To be content with Something, means we aren't moving forward. We don't strive to move backward. We don't strive to die. We strive to live. If we stop living at Something, then we don't progress. We remain stagnant. Time stops. Space stops. If science stopped exploring answers to questions, we would die out as a race. If people stopped believing in a spiritual existence, we would die out as a race.

    That is why it is necessary to believe in something beyond what is. If we didn't, we wouldn't be.
    Souls of the animal kingdom: eagle, fox, bottle-nose dolphin, octopus, house cat. Okay, let's jump this jump. -- Rod Kimble

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    1,041
    Post Thanks / Like
    That which is "supernatural" exists outside the laws of "nature", thereby outside the realm of science.
    And sometimes we expand the laws of nature to fit new data. Then, the supernatural becomes natural.
    Assume nothing. This includes assuming that you should not assume.

  4. #4
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    boca raton, florida.... BUT I WISH TEXAS!!1
    Posts
    258
    Post Thanks / Like
    This depends all on whether or not you believe science can explain only the things its capable of measuring. If so, you are a naturalist, you believe nothing in the supernatural and the only things that science can measure are proven to exist, thus one is atheist.

    There's one problem with this thinking though, thoughts for example, can't be measured scientifically. You can measure what parts of the brain are active during a thought, but the thought itself can't be seen by science, thus the metaphysical world does exist.

  5. #5
    Owner / Senior Admin

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    19,394
    Post Thanks / Like
    How does science explain 1) morality, 2) origin from nothingness, 3) emotions?

    Science, does not explain everything. This is not to say that the only alternative is the supernatural by any means. But IMO, too much "faith", is place upon science.
    -=]Apokalupsis[=-
    Senior Administrator
    -------------------------

    I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. - Thomas Jefferson




  6. #6
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    1,041
    Post Thanks / Like
    1) Morality - it comes from naturally evolved instincts, combined with lots of socialization

    2) Something from nothing - shhhhhh, we're not supposed to ask that question, remember?

    3) Emotions - evolution - emotions are what provide motivation, and animals with motivation are more likely to reproduce
    Assume nothing. This includes assuming that you should not assume.

  7. #7
    Owner / Senior Admin

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    19,394
    Post Thanks / Like
    1) if that were true, then all people would have the same morals.

    2) sorry.

    3) that doesn't "explain" emotion, its existence, what causes it, the changes, the various emotions, why some have x and some have y at different times, etc... What is it to feel happy? What is it to feel greed? What is it scientifically to feel remorse?

    Science...does not explain "it all".
    -=]Apokalupsis[=-
    Senior Administrator
    -------------------------

    I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. - Thomas Jefferson




  8. #8
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    1,041
    Post Thanks / Like
    1) if that were true, then all people would have the same morals.
    All people do have the same primitive morals, I believe - but they have them in different amounts, and thus these primitive morals combine to form differing complex morals.


    Science...does not explain "it all".
    not yet...

    I'd be willing to bet your soul that God could explain "it all" in scientific terms. I am sure humans will always have questions left, if for no other reason than that the complexity involved will be too great, such as with perfectly understanding emotion.
    Assume nothing. This includes assuming that you should not assume.

  9. #9
    Owner / Senior Admin

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    19,394
    Post Thanks / Like
    1) I disagree. Example: Is homosexuality immoral or moral?

    The context of science here, can only be "as we know it". And as we know it, science leaves a lot open to question, and relying on it for all things would be an erroneous endeavour IMO.

    Is the human mind infallible? If yes, then we know all things. If not, then we may be mistaken. If science is always the answer, does it not follow that science as practiced and engaged in through a fallible mind, may be mistaken? Thus, the statement is: "Science, while flawed (less than perfect), should be relied upon for all things". A logical statement that obviously while valid, is not actual.
    -=]Apokalupsis[=-
    Senior Administrator
    -------------------------

    I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. - Thomas Jefferson




  10. #10
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    1,027
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by HappyLady
    If science stopped exploring answers to questions, we would die out as a race. If people stopped believing in a spiritual existence, we would die out as a race.

    That is why it is necessary to believe in something beyond what is. If we didn't, we wouldn't be.
    Then why is this not also the case for every other living thing?

    With all due respect, HapplyLady, your post seems like so much jibberish.

  11. #11
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    9,471
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by HappyLady
    On one end of a personal construct is Nothing. On the other end is Everything. Once there was no human life. Nothing. Now there is Something because we're here. But we all know we don't have Everything. Science strives to invent new things and answer old questions. Religion works to fill voids in people who feel something is lacking. Drugs work the same way. Therefore, we'd have to summize that we don't have Everything.

    What that means is that Everything lies beyond our comprehension.

    So, we humans who want Everything, but are only Something, strive to figure out ways to get Everything. We do science, we do religion, we do spirituality, etc...because we can't really know the "right" way to get Everything since it lies beyond our comprehension. Some people are content living their life not striving for Everything. They are content with Something. But here is why that behavior is self-destructive.

    Humanity is constantly striving to move forward in some way. In this world, time and space are designed to be incremental. It moves forward. To be content with Something, means we aren't moving forward. We don't strive to move backward. We don't strive to die. We strive to live. If we stop living at Something, then we don't progress. We remain stagnant. Time stops. Space stops. If science stopped exploring answers to questions, we would die out as a race. If people stopped believing in a spiritual existence, we would die out as a race.

    That is why it is necessary to believe in something beyond what is. If we didn't, we wouldn't be.
    Ooooohhhhhhmmmmmmmmm...... (Awakens from a vision of a Zen Buddhist temple). Actually a lot of that makes sense. Most people want everything, and we have to learn to be content with something, not constantly striving for more.

  12. #12
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    1,027
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Jordan
    This depends all on whether or not you believe science can explain only the things its capable of measuring. If so, you are a naturalist, you believe nothing in the supernatural and the only things that science can measure are proven to exist, thus one is atheist.
    Wrong. Science employs a methodological naturalism. This is a fundamental necessity for science to work. It does not follow that if one believes that science can only exlplain that which can be measured, that one is therefore an atheist or even a naturalist.

    There's one problem with this thinking though, thoughts for example, can't be measured scientifically. You can measure what parts of the brain are active during a thought, but the thought itself can't be seen by science, thus the metaphysical world does exist.
    This is completely erroneous. Science is steadily advancing in its ability to explain the brain and the mind. And there is no logical barrier that would prevent science from eventually being able to accurately describe ('measure') exactly what one is thinking from merely observing the state of the brain (and perhaps extended nervous system), although this capability is far off indeed.

    Even if it could not, that would do nothing to demonstrate the existence of a metaphysical world. Are you seriously contending that thoughts are metaphysical? Do you think that athiests and naturalists don't believe in the reality of thoughts?

    What do you think the terms 'metaphysical', 'supernatural', and 'exist' mean?

  13. #13
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    1,027
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Apokalupsis
    How does science explain 1) morality, 2) origin from nothingness, 3) emotions?
    I presume you believe that the belief in the supernatural can better explain these concepts. I submit that the appeal to the supernatural can only give 'answers' that lack any genuine explanation.

  14. #14
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    1,027
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Apokalupsis
    that doesn't "explain" emotion, its existence, what causes it, the changes, the various emotions, why some have x and some have y at different times, etc... What is it to feel happy? What is it to feel greed? What is it scientifically to feel remorse?

    Science...does not explain "it all".
    Science can do more to explain all these aspects that you list better than any appeal to the supernatural.

  15. #15
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    1,027
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Apokalupsis
    I disagree. Example: Is homosexuality immoral or moral
    Do you honestly think that an appeal to the supernatural has a better chance at answering this question than a scientific approach?

  16. #16
    Owner / Senior Admin

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    19,394
    Post Thanks / Like
    None of your posts address the questions posited. I never said anything about the supernatural, it's validity or invalidity, it's ability or lack thereof to explain anything. The challenge was of science. It is not the "end all be all". And I have asked for scientific answers for specific questions. Is it then your position, that science has no answer?
    -=]Apokalupsis[=-
    Senior Administrator
    -------------------------

    I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. - Thomas Jefferson




  17. #17
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Pray for our troops
    Posts
    5,340
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by AntiMaterialist
    I'd be willing to bet your soul that God could explain "it all" in scientific terms. I am sure humans will always have questions left, if for no other reason than that the complexity involved will be too great

    Science is the exploration of God's visible mysteries.

    A little more than 200 years ago Lightning was viewed as supernatural. No one could explain it. If you or your home were struck by lightning -- well you must have done something to deserve it. The more answers science finds...the more questions are revealed though.

    That pertains though only to the visible...that which can be seen and/or measured.

    Again I ask what of the workings of the human mind...

    I have a client whose son suffered a major head trauma. He was clinicly dead for a period of time even considered brain dead for some time. He laid in a coma for many weeks and months. During his recovery his parents were told he would never be more than a vegetable. While he was on life support for a number of weeks, his parents refused to to remove him from it. He was only 20 years old just out of the Army and in otherwise perfect health. He did eventually recover.

    Today his doctor...a specialist at a major US clinic likes to show students MRIs of his brain today and ask them "what is the prognosis for this patient?". "Vegetable" is a common answer. The doctor then brings this young man walking on to the podium area and informs the class that this is indeed the patient whose MRIs they have just viewed -- always to much shock and awe......The young man still sees a therapist and still is not entirely pre-occurance...he still has problems with short term memory. To meet him though you would never think that he should be a "vegetable". The doctor does this to drive home a point -- although we might one day understand how the Brain works -- we can not suppose to understand how the human mind and spirit work -- we probably never will.

    The medical community has a word for such occurances -- "miracle" or in scientific terms -- spontaneous unexplained recovery...it all means the same thing though. Science can not and may never be able to explian it. Such things are supernatural.

  18. #18
    Owner / Senior Admin

    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    19,394
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Galendir
    Do you honestly think that an appeal to the supernatural has a better chance at answering this question than a scientific approach?
    Fallacy of false dilemma w/ a dash of straw man. It isn't a matter of: it must be science or the supernatural. The objection is of AM's statement that all people have the same primitive morals - but have them in different amounts, and thus these primitive morals combine to form differing complex morals.
    -=]Apokalupsis[=-
    Senior Administrator
    -------------------------

    I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. - Thomas Jefferson




  19. #19
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Pray for our troops
    Posts
    5,340
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Galendir
    Do you honestly think that an appeal to the supernatural has a better chance at answering ....question(s) than a scientific approach?

    Well Galendir, there are about five physicians in my parish who will tell you that there are many things for which appealing to the "supernatural" is better than any scientific approach sometimes. Although one should not discount science...science is not the be all to end all.

  20. #20
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    1,027
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Apokalupsis
    None of your posts address the questions posited. I never said anything about the supernatural, it's validity or invalidity, it's ability or lack thereof to explain anything. The challenge was of science. It is not the "end all be all". And I have asked for scientific answers for specific questions. Is it then your position, that science has no answer?
    Do you recall what the subject of this thread is?
    If you're not addressing the topic, then why are you posting here?

 

 
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Yes, God exists!
    By Josh.24:15 in forum Religion
    Replies: 177
    Last Post: February 25th, 2012, 03:14 PM
  2. Is the Bible 100% the word of God?
    By AntiMaterialist in forum Religion
    Replies: 487
    Last Post: April 14th, 2007, 02:31 PM
  3. Are fundamentalists evil?
    By AntiMaterialist in forum Religion
    Replies: 158
    Last Post: June 5th, 2004, 07:12 AM
  4. Is it reasonable to believe in a god?
    By F1Fan in forum Philosophical Debates
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: March 22nd, 2004, 02:51 PM
  5. Witchcraft
    By AntiMaterialist in forum Religion
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: March 13th, 2004, 11:26 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •