Logic and the Paranormal

[George-ananda]

I was thinking how almost everyone I know can tell one or two or more stories from their life that are seemingly paranormal sounding. But it seems like at least half of the people on RF don’t believe in anything paranormal.

Events happen spontaneously and we can debate each event forever as to whether it involved the supernatural or not. But the position of the non-believer of the paranormal must be that ALL alleged seemingly paranormal events are non-supernatural. When there’s been untold thousands/millions reported and unreported stories in the course of the existence of the human species; the chance that all are false becomes astronomically slim when I consider the quality of so many I’ve heard (the proverbial drop in the ocean I’ve heard).

Logic tells me the paranormal exists beyond reasonable doubt.

Does this make sense or do you disagree?

Edit: For this discussion: Paranormal/Supernatural = things that cannot be explained by phenomena known to modern science.

Materialist (I don't know if the perfect word exists)= Those that think alleged paranormal events can ultimately be explained away by known phenomena.

2nd Edit:In the bigger picture here's what I believe.

There is ultimately no such thing as the paranormal or supernatural. It's just that science has an incomplete understanding of all that is natural. Even things, like souls, astral planes may someday be part of science. I just use the terms supernatural/paranormal in the OP to describe phenomena that can't be explained by anything currently accepted by mainstream science.

 

[Willamena]

The "position of the non-believer" you quote not accurate. Being a believer does not entail equating the paranormal with the supernatural, nor does being a non-believer entail dismissing both.

That so many who dismiss one also dismiss the other doesn't make it necessary to do so.

Edit: I had an incident in my life that I can't explain and would be comfortable with others declaring it in the category of paranormal, but I wouldn't, and it's not even necessary that it be considered abnormal. It's never necessary that anything be supernatural.

 

[George-ananda]

The "position of the non-believer" you quote not accurate. Being a believer does not entail equating the paranormal with the supernatural, nor does being a non-believer entail dismissing both.

That so many who dismiss one also dismiss the other doesn't make it necessary to do so.

I intended it to mean 'non-believer of the paranormal' not 'non-believer of God'.

I edited the OP to make it clearer. Thank you.

 

[George-ananda]

Edit: I had an incident in my life that I can't explain and would be comfortable with others declaring it in the category of paranormal, but I wouldn't, and it's not even necessary that it be considered abnormal. It's never necessary that anything be supernatural.

Words. words, words, are tricky on this forum. For the sake of this discussion I was intending to mean things that do not fit in the materialist worldview.

Maybe I need to edit the OP again until it's so long no one will read it

 

[Straw Dog]

It's never necessary that anything be supernatural.

I agree with Willamena on this one. Paranormal phenomenon could still occur according to natural laws or within hidden dimensions that we just don't really understand yet. Physical reality is incredibly complicated with a great deal of depth and subtlety that often goes unrecognized by those that deny physicalism.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Logic tells me the paranormal exists beyond reasonable doubt.

Does this make sense or do you disagree?

You either misuse or misunderstand the word 'logic'. The stream of faulty reasoning that reduces to:

• the category 'unexplainable' is equivalent to the category 'paranormal'
• the unexplainable exists, therefore
• the paranormal exists

is, indeed, logical, but only as an example of ...

• garbage in; garbage out

 

[George-ananda]

I agree with Willamena on this one. Paranormal phenomenon could still occur according to natural laws or within hidden dimensions that we just don't really understand yet. Physical reality is incredibly complicated with a great deal of depth and subtlety that often goes unrecognized by those that deny physicalism.

I agree. Science of the gaps.

I guess the OP still isn't clear. I was simply referring to materialists that think alleged paranormal phenomena can be explained away by current knowledge (hallucinations, etc.)

Maybe I need to edit the OP for a third time.

 

[George-ananda]

You either misuse or misunderstand the word 'logic'. The stream of faulty reasoning that reduces to:

• the category 'unexplainable' is equivalent to the category 'paranormal'
• the unexplainable exists, therefore
• the paranormal exists

is, indeed, logical, but only as an example of ...

• garbage in; garbage out

See my last edit to the OP on Materialist (and the lack of perfect words)

unexplainable=paranormal=not explainable by known phenomena

So, with this clarification, I don't think your criticism holds.

 

[Straw Dog]

I agree. Science of the gaps.

I guess the OP still isn't clear. I was simply referring to materialists that think alleged paranormal phenomena can be explained away by current knowledge (hallucinations, etc.)

Maybe I need to edit the OP for a third time.

Oh, I see. Well, I think a fair number of cases can be explained via gas leaks or electromagnetic fields causing hallucinations. We also can't rule out the amazing theater of the human imagination. There are legitimate reasons for skepticism, but I'm not foolish enough anymore to rule anything outside the scope of experience as impossible. Reality is stranger than fiction afterall.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I was simply referring to materialists that think alleged paranormal phenomena can be explained away by current knowledge (hallucinations, etc.)

So, you build a silly caricature which you proceed to pummel and then claim: "Logic tells me the paranormal exists beyond reasonable doubt."

Masterful.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Barbara Forest's Methodological Naturalism and Philosophical Naturalism: Clarifying the Connection (2000) remains one of the better summaries I've encountered so far. It should be thoughtfully read and considered - more than once.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

I tend to head towards the type that think that much of paranormal activities can be associated to hallucinations and the like. Mostly because there is so much left to understand about the human brain and how it relates internal and externally to the environment and it's perceptions of such.

 

[George-ananda]

So, you build a silly caricature which you proceed to pummel and then claim: "Logic tells me the paranormal exists beyond reasonable doubt."

Masterful.

It is saying something important.

It is beyond reasonable doubt that phenomenon exists that cannot be explained by any known phenomenon accepted by science.

 

[Willamena]

I was thinking how almost everyone I know can tell one or two or more stories from their life that are seemingly paranormal sounding. But it seems like at least half of the people on RF don’t believe in anything paranormal.

Events happen spontaneously and we can debate each event forever as to whether it involved the supernatural or not. But the position of the non-believer of the paranormal must be that ALL alleged seemingly paranormal events are non-supernatural. When there’s been untold thousands/millions reported and unreported stories in the course of the existence of the human species; the chance that all are false becomes astronomically slim when I consider the quality of so many I’ve heard (the proverbial drop in the ocean I’ve heard).

Logic tells me the paranormal exists beyond reasonable doubt.

Does this make sense or do you disagree?

Edit: For this discussion: Paranormal/Supernatural = things that do not fit into the materialist worldview.

Materialist (I don't know if the perfect word exists)= Those that think alleged paranormal events can ultimately be explained away by known phenomena.

Thank you for editing, but I think you're just introducing more confusion. Materialism isn't necessarily the problem of the non-believer in paranormal.

I think it important to stress the terms, that paranormal is a term invented in the 1920's to mystify and romanticize unexplainable events and incidents, and is, I think, a cousin of scientism, which romanticizes science. Scientism is the attitude that science will eventually explain all, especially what is presently unexplained, in response to those who uphold that supernatural miracles occur; the supernatural attitude, also in response, says some things can never be explained by science because they are of the realm of god(s); and the paranormal attitude, in response, says that we can investigate, but that there are some things science is inadequate to explain. They are all standing in the same boat, looking at the same picture. It's not the attitudes that are faulty, it's the picture that is, and that fault informs the attitudes. Straw Dog touched on it.

Something happens to a person that is unexplained by the person or anyone who finds out about it. That it's unexplained, amazing, mind-blowing, astounding, unusual--anything like that--doesn't have to mean it's not natural. The thought that it's a not-natural experience is just that--an added thought, one that doesn't have to occur. Nothing necessarily makes an event mean that.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

hallucination, deficient observation, coincidence, reconstructed memory, embellishment, ...

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

It is beyond reasonable doubt that phenomenon exists that cannot be explained by any known phenomenon accepted by science.

Having read Gödel, Escher, Bach I don't doubt it. But why not offer three or four examples that are "beyond reasonable doubt"?

 

[George-ananda]

hallucination, deficient observation, coincidence, reconstructed memory, embellishment, ...

100% of the time right...?

 

[idav]

Edit: For this discussion: Paranormal/Supernatural = things that do not fit into the materialist worldview.

Materialist = Those that think alleged paranormal events can be explained away by known phenomena (I don't know if the perfect word exists)

Within a materialist view, eventually everything will fall under known phenomenon and will fit the materialist worldview .

Are we talking about things like thoughts as being immaterial, anything immaterial is a result of something material. Whatever material is supposed to be, energy or frequency or whatever.

 

[George-ananda]

I don't doubt it, but why not offer three or four examples that are "beyond reasonable doubt"?

Ya, and each one good for a 100 post debate by the hard-core Skeptics. Been there, man.

 

[Koldo]

It is saying something important.

It is beyond reasonable doubt that phenomenon exists that cannot be explained by any known phenomenon accepted by science.

Let me fix it up to you:

"It is, to me, beyond reasonable doubt that phenomenon exists that cannot be explained by any known phenomenon accepted by science."

Done.