Supernatural or scientific evidence?

[Twilight Hue]

I agree entirely.

Thank you for pointing out the distinction. Science only deals with the Objective.

What is it then - if it's not supernatural, and its not Science?

I think it is a shame, and this is the failing of Science in my view, is that it closes its eyes to the Subjective world and the fact that changes, experiements and advancement in understanding and knowledge can be manifested in the Subjective universe.

I understand why one would argue that my example is not considered Science, for as I said Science is mainly interested in what is pragmatically useful, and not what is actually true.
The way quantum mechanics has been adopted and accepted is a perfect example of this.

You might find this abstract (PDF) of particular interest from Princeton U.
Titled, "Science of the Subjective" by Robert G. Jahn and Brenda J Dunne.
http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/pdfs/sos.pdf

I find it a fascinating read dealing with the issues that you are addressing that tend to exacerbate scientific processes and it's progress. -NM-

 

[Skeptisch]

...but Thelema is certainly a philosophy that should be taken seriously...

“Thelema” sounds pretty “hocus pocish” and does not seem to fit a physics teacher no matter how much she professes to separate physics from the supernatural.

“Thelema is a religious philosophy that was developed by the early 20th century British writer and ceremonial magician Aleister Crowley. He believed himself to be the prophet of a new age, the Aeon of Horus, based upon a religious experience that he had in Egypt in 1904. By his account, a possibly non-corporeal being that called itself Aiwass contacted him and dictated a text known as The Book of the Law or Liber AL vel Legis, which outlined the principles of Thelema.”

 

[Octavia156]

“Thelema” sounds pretty “hocus pocish” and does not seem to fit a physics teacher no matter how much she professes to separate physics from the supernatural.

“Thelema is a religious philosophy that was developed by the early 20th century British writer and ceremonial magician Aleister Crowley. He believed himself to be the prophet of a new age, the Aeon of Horus, based upon a religious experience that he had in Egypt in 1904. By his account, a possibly non-corporeal being that called itself Aiwass contacted him and dictated a text known as The Book of the Law or Liber AL vel Legis, which outlined the principles of Thelema.”

What are you trying to say Skeptisch....? By mocking something you clearly don't yet understand, you're starting to make yourself look rather silly.. Perhaps you ought to do a bit more research past the opening paragraph of wikipedia before you make snap judgements on a person or their gnosis.

And yes.. I'm not your average Physicist...

 

[Octavia156]

You might find this abstract (PDF) of particular interest from Princeton U.
Titled, "Science of the Subjective" by Robert G. Jahn and Brenda J Dunne.
http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/pdfs/sos.pdf

I find it a fascinating read dealing with the issues that you are addressing that tend to exacerbate scientific processes and it's progress. -NM-

Thanks NM, this looks great!!


Opening line illustrates my point:

The word “science” derives from a Latin verb, scire, meaning to know or to understand; it
could thus properly apply to any process of comprehension of any topic or form of
experience. But in contemporary usage the term has taken on an array of more specific
implications, depending on the context, the user, or the audience.

 

[Skeptisch]

Perhaps you ought to do a bit more research past the opening paragraph of wikipedia before you make snap judgements on a person or their gnosis.

The idea was to give the reader a basic idea what Thelema is, to copy the whole account would not have been appropriate. You are of course right I don’t understand anything or anyone who is into the supernatural.

 

[Octavia156]

Me neither... I've never seen nor experienced anything supernatural.

But I do believe in a subjective and I practise Alchemy alongside Science, which is actually quite traditional for a Physicist - Look at Newton, he was much more concerned with Spiritual Alchemy than he was in Physics.

The fathers of Science were Mystics... mysticism has nothing to do the the supernatural.

 

[Skeptisch]

I've never seen nor experienced anything supernatural.
But I do believe in a subjective and I practise Alchemy alongside Science, which is actually quite traditional for a Physicist - Look at Newton, he was much more concerned with Spiritual Alchemy than he was in Physics.

You appear to be one mixed up and confused sister.

 

[Octavia156]

Clearly I'm not confused - I know what I'm talking about!

I am sorry that I'm confusing YOU

The rude way you are addressing me is indicative of a great fear of the unknown, the only defense to which you can muster is a vague attempt at mockery.

Instead of attempting to understand more about how Scientific Mind can still have a sense of Spiritual Alchemy you chose to make a poor attempt to ridicule something that challenges your belief system - one wherein all Physicists are Material Atheists.

Shame on you, Skeptish!

arrogant sceptisim will get you nowhere very quickly,

remember child, There are only two Truths that you will ever know: That you are ignorant, and you will die.

 

[lightstorm]

Hi all. I just wanted to point out that you can be a scientist and a believer of something. My physics teacher in high school was quite good at it. I bring this up because Octavia reminds me of him a bit. He was quite capable of separating science and religion. We had many talks (not during class of course) about how the two go together and how they influence each other. I myself follow the same way of thinking these days, though my religious beliefs differ from his, as well as Octavia's. I'm a physics major in college right now, yet I hold beliefs that I think many of you would scoff at. A good scientist can separate their work from themselves. Just because someone may believe in something that is scientifically unproven doesn't mean that person is incapable of doing research, etc., with an unbias viewpoint. What we do in the lab has nothing to do with what we do in our private lives.

As for the original post topic, it would probably be science. I say probably because I'm not well versed in psychology or medicine so I choose to not speak definitively.

 

[The Neo Nerd]

If we could find a mental process for a cancer patient to cure himself, and this process would be teachable, measurable and repeatable, what would that indicate?

• The supernatural exists
• Scientific evidence (the scientific method, measurable, repeatable)

Preternatural