Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I wouldn't have a problem if actual evidence led me there.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Supernatural - Science?
- Thread starter nPeace
- Start date
The realm of the physical sciences, the set of all things with objective existence, nature, are all names for external reality, the world external to the self.
The word 'supernatural' means literally 'above nature', 'outside nature'. On that definition (and I can't offer an alternative) the supernatural is not part of reality.
So the only way it can exist is as something imagined in brains.
Reasoned enquiry can be interested in questions about why humans like to imagine the supernatural, and what they like to imagine it contains. But entities and phenomena that exist only in imagination are not themselves available for empirical examination.
So they can't be studies by science.
A Vestigial Mote
Well-Known Member
The real problem comes in when whether or not something even exists is unknown (or worse, unknowable). As soon as that is in the equation on a topic/item/concept then there has to be evidence of its existence before it can even be investigated. Until then it is even less than a theory - because a lot of times, certain things posited as "supernatural" don't even have anything verifiable/real to base a hypothesis in. For instance, some assertion or idea of a multiverse - you can say all day that you "hypothesize" that this or that is true, but how do you make good on that hypothesis through verification of its truth? Can you demonstrate the multiverse? Where does one even start? ETs - the same. Spirits - the same. God - the same.Interesting way of looking at it. I can't argue against that logic.
So maybe scientists should stop limiting themselves for convenience then.
It isn't a matter of scientists "limiting themselves" - its a matter of the realities of our universe containing what they contain, and not containing what they do not contain. If you're miffed that there's "not enough" (aka ZERO) ghosts (for example) floating around - blame reality. It makes no sense to blame scientists.
Why are we here?
We are here because of fuel
Um... Guys what are you laughing at? Do you find that fun...
I listened to the entire talk. Interesting.
Why is our universe fine-tuned for life? | Brian Greene
If you like, you can listen to the entire talk - The excitement starts imo, at 11:12
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's not the highlight of this thread. Just thought I'd share.
Question:
Does science consider what's supernatural?
Your thoughts. Appreciate it if you say why, you answer as you do.
Hypothetical
A hypothesis (plural hypotheses) is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon. For a hypothesis to be a scientific hypothesis, the scientific method requires that one can test it. Scientists generally base scientific hypotheses on previous observations that cannot satisfactorily be explained with the available scientific theories.
Info:
supernatural
(of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature.
...is that which exists (or is claimed to exist), yet cannot be explained by laws of nature. Examples often include characteristics of or relating to ghosts, angels, gods, souls and spirits, non-material beings, or anything else considered beyond nature like magic, miracles, etc.
Over time, things once thought to be supernatural such as lightning, seasons, and human senses have been shown to have entirely naturalistic explanations and origins. Some believe that which is considered supernatural will someday be discovered to be completely physical and natural. Those who believe only the physical world exists are called naturalists. Those who believe similarly often maintain skeptical attitudes and beliefs concerning supernatural concepts.
Multiverse
Arguments against multiverse theories
In his 2003 New York Times opinion piece, "A Brief History of the Multiverse", the author and cosmologist Paul Davies offered a variety of arguments that multiverse theories are non-scientific:
For a start, how is the existence of the other universes to be tested? To be sure, all cosmologists accept that there are some regions of the universe that lie beyond the reach of our telescopes, but somewhere on the slippery slope between that and the idea that there are an infinite number of universes, credibility reaches a limit. As one slips down that slope, more and more must be accepted on faith, and less and less is open to scientific verification. Extreme multiverse explanations are therefore reminiscent of theological discussions. Indeed, invoking an infinity of unseen universes to explain the unusual features of the one we do see is just as ad hoc as invoking an unseen Creator. The multiverse theory may be dressed up in scientific language, but in essence it requires the same leap of faith.
— Paul Davies, The New York Times, "A Brief History of the Multiverse"
George Ellis, writing in August 2011, provided a criticism of the multiverse, and pointed out that it is not a traditional scientific theory. He accepts that the multiverse is thought to exist far beyond the cosmological horizon. He emphasized that it is theorized to be so far away that it's unlikely any evidence will ever be found. Ellis also explained that some theorists do not believe the lack of empirical testability falsifiability is a major concern, but he is opposed to that line of thinking:
Many physicists who talk about the multiverse, especially advocates of the string landscape, do not care much about parallel universes per se. For them, objections to the multiverse as a concept are unimportant. Their theories live or die based on internal consistency and, one hopes, eventual laboratory testing.
Ellis says that scientists have proposed the idea of the multiverse as a way of explaining the nature of existence. He points out that it ultimately leaves those questions unresolved because it is a metaphysical issue that cannot be resolved by empirical science. He argues that observational testing is at the core of science and should not be abandoned:
As skeptical as I am, I think the contemplation of the multiverse is an excellent opportunity to reflect on the nature of science and on the ultimate nature of existence: why we are here.... In looking at this concept, we need an open mind, though not too open. It is a delicate path to tread. Parallel universes may or may not exist; the case is unproved. We are going to have to live with that uncertainty. Nothing is wrong with scientifically based philosophical speculation, which is what multiverse proposals are. But we should name it for what it is.
— George Ellis, Scientific American, "Does the Multiverse Really Exist?"
Extraterrestrial life (ETs)
Extraterrestrial life, also called alien life (or, if it is a sentient or relatively complex individual, an "extraterrestrial" or "alien"), is [*life that occurs outside of Earth and that probably did not originate from Earth. These hypothetical life forms may range from simple prokaryotes to beings with civilizations far more advanced than humanity.*] The Drake equation speculates about the existence of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe. The science of extraterrestrial life in all its forms is known as exobiology.
The concept of extraterrestrial life, and [*particularly extraterrestrial intelligence*], has had a major cultural impact, chiefly in works of science fiction. Over the years, [*science fiction communicated scientific ideas, imagined a wide range of possibilities, and influenced public interest in and perspectives of extraterrestrial life.*] One shared space is the debate over the wisdom of attempting communication with extraterrestrial intelligence. Some encourage aggressive methods to try for contact with intelligent extraterrestrial life. Others—citing the tendency of technologically advanced human societies to enslave or wipe out less advanced societies—argue that it may be dangerous to actively call attention to Earth.
Intelligent life
Sapience is closely related to the term "sophia" often defined as "transcendent wisdom", "ultimate reality", or the ultimate truth of things. Sapiential perspective of wisdom is said to lie in the heart of every religion, where it is often acquired through intuitive knowing. This type of wisdom is described as going beyond mere practical wisdom and includes self-knowledge, interconnectedness, conditioned origination of mind-states and other deeper understandings of subjective experience. This type of wisdom can also lead to the ability of an individual to act with appropriate judgment, a broad understanding of situations and greater appreciation/compassion towards other living beings.
transcendent
adjective
beyond or above the range of normal or merely physical human experience.
surpassing the ordinary; exceptional.
transcendent (comparative more transcendent, superlative most transcendent)
1. surpassing usual limits
2. beyond the range of usual perception
3. free from constraints of the material world
If an ET is a more advanced life form, what prevents it from being supernatural - able to break all barriers of "natural" laws - (being completely invisible etc.)?
Astrobiology
Astrobiology is a branch of biology concerned with the origins, early evolution, distribution, and future of life in the universe. Astrobiology considers the question of whether extraterrestrial life exists, and how humans can detect it if it does. The term exobiology is similar.
Astrobiology makes use of molecular biology, biophysics, biochemistry, chemistry, astronomy, exoplanetology and geology to investigate the possibility of life on other worlds and help recognize biospheres that might be different from that on Earth. The origin and early evolution of life is an inseparable part of the discipline of astrobiology. Astrobiology concerns itself with interpretation of existing scientific data, and although speculation is entertained to give context, astrobiology concerns itself primarily with hypotheses that fit firmly into existing scientific theories.
Astronomy
[*Astronomy is a natural science that studies celestial objects and phenomena.*] It applies mathematics, physics, and chemistry, in an effort to explain the origin of those objects and phenomena and their evolution. Objects of interest include planets, moons, stars, galaxies, and comets; the phenomena include supernova explosions, gamma ray bursts, and cosmic microwave background radiation. [*More generally, all phenomena that originate outside Earth's atmosphere are within the purview of astronomy. A related but distinct subject, physical cosmology, is concerned with the study of the Universe as a whole.*]
Phenomenon
A phenomenon is any thing which manifests itself. Phenomena are often, but not always, understood as "things that appear" or "experiences" for a sentient being, or in principle may be so.
The term came into its modern philosophical usage through Immanuel Kant, who contrasted it with the noumenon. In contrast to a phenomenon, a noumenon cannot be directly observed. Kant was heavily influenced by Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz in this part of his philosophy, in which phenomenon and noumenon serve as interrelated technical terms. Far predating this, the ancient Greek Pyrrhonist philosopher Sextus Empiricus also used phenomenon and noumenon as interrelated technical terms.
Scientific
[*In scientific usage, a phenomenon is any event that is observable, however common it might be, even if it requires the use of instrumentation to observe, record, or compile data concerning it. For example, in physics, a phenomenon may be described by a system of information related to matter, energy, or spacetime, such as Isaac Newton's observations of the moon's orbit and of gravity, or Galileo Galilei's observations of the motion of a pendulum.
Another example of scientific phenomena can be found in the experience of phantom limb sensations. This occurrence, the sensation of feeling in amputated limbs, is reported by over 70% of amputees. Although the limb is no longer present, they report still experiencing sensations. This is an extraordinary event that defies typical logic and has been a source of much curiosity within the medical and physiological fields.*]
Dark matter is so named because it neither absorbs nor emits light and thereforecannot be directly observed. But astronomers know dark matter exists because it interacts gravitationally with the "normal" matter we can see and touch.
Sorry about the length. I just wanted to simplify it.
No.
No simplicity needed
sealchan
Well-Known Member
Why are we here?
We are here because of fuel
Um... Guys what are you laughing at? Do you find that fun...
I listened to the entire talk. Interesting.
Why is our universe fine-tuned for life? | Brian Greene
If you like, you can listen to the entire talk - The excitement starts imo, at 11:12
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's not the highlight of this thread. Just thought I'd share.
Question:
Does science consider what's supernatural?
Your thoughts. Appreciate it if you say why, you answer as you do.
Hypothetical
A hypothesis (plural hypotheses) is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon. For a hypothesis to be a scientific hypothesis, the scientific method requires that one can test it. Scientists generally base scientific hypotheses on previous observations that cannot satisfactorily be explained with the available scientific theories.
Info:
supernatural
(of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature.
...is that which exists (or is claimed to exist), yet cannot be explained by laws of nature. Examples often include characteristics of or relating to ghosts, angels, gods, souls and spirits, non-material beings, or anything else considered beyond nature like magic, miracles, etc.
Over time, things once thought to be supernatural such as lightning, seasons, and human senses have been shown to have entirely naturalistic explanations and origins. Some believe that which is considered supernatural will someday be discovered to be completely physical and natural. Those who believe only the physical world exists are called naturalists. Those who believe similarly often maintain skeptical attitudes and beliefs concerning supernatural concepts.
Multiverse
Arguments against multiverse theories
In his 2003 New York Times opinion piece, "A Brief History of the Multiverse", the author and cosmologist Paul Davies offered a variety of arguments that multiverse theories are non-scientific:
For a start, how is the existence of the other universes to be tested? To be sure, all cosmologists accept that there are some regions of the universe that lie beyond the reach of our telescopes, but somewhere on the slippery slope between that and the idea that there are an infinite number of universes, credibility reaches a limit. As one slips down that slope, more and more must be accepted on faith, and less and less is open to scientific verification. Extreme multiverse explanations are therefore reminiscent of theological discussions. Indeed, invoking an infinity of unseen universes to explain the unusual features of the one we do see is just as ad hoc as invoking an unseen Creator. The multiverse theory may be dressed up in scientific language, but in essence it requires the same leap of faith.
— Paul Davies, The New York Times, "A Brief History of the Multiverse"
George Ellis, writing in August 2011, provided a criticism of the multiverse, and pointed out that it is not a traditional scientific theory. He accepts that the multiverse is thought to exist far beyond the cosmological horizon. He emphasized that it is theorized to be so far away that it's unlikely any evidence will ever be found. Ellis also explained that some theorists do not believe the lack of empirical testability falsifiability is a major concern, but he is opposed to that line of thinking:
Many physicists who talk about the multiverse, especially advocates of the string landscape, do not care much about parallel universes per se. For them, objections to the multiverse as a concept are unimportant. Their theories live or die based on internal consistency and, one hopes, eventual laboratory testing.
Ellis says that scientists have proposed the idea of the multiverse as a way of explaining the nature of existence. He points out that it ultimately leaves those questions unresolved because it is a metaphysical issue that cannot be resolved by empirical science. He argues that observational testing is at the core of science and should not be abandoned:
As skeptical as I am, I think the contemplation of the multiverse is an excellent opportunity to reflect on the nature of science and on the ultimate nature of existence: why we are here.... In looking at this concept, we need an open mind, though not too open. It is a delicate path to tread. Parallel universes may or may not exist; the case is unproved. We are going to have to live with that uncertainty. Nothing is wrong with scientifically based philosophical speculation, which is what multiverse proposals are. But we should name it for what it is.
— George Ellis, Scientific American, "Does the Multiverse Really Exist?"
Extraterrestrial life (ETs)
Extraterrestrial life, also called alien life (or, if it is a sentient or relatively complex individual, an "extraterrestrial" or "alien"), is [*life that occurs outside of Earth and that probably did not originate from Earth. These hypothetical life forms may range from simple prokaryotes to beings with civilizations far more advanced than humanity.*] The Drake equation speculates about the existence of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe. The science of extraterrestrial life in all its forms is known as exobiology.
The concept of extraterrestrial life, and [*particularly extraterrestrial intelligence*], has had a major cultural impact, chiefly in works of science fiction. Over the years, [*science fiction communicated scientific ideas, imagined a wide range of possibilities, and influenced public interest in and perspectives of extraterrestrial life.*] One shared space is the debate over the wisdom of attempting communication with extraterrestrial intelligence. Some encourage aggressive methods to try for contact with intelligent extraterrestrial life. Others—citing the tendency of technologically advanced human societies to enslave or wipe out less advanced societies—argue that it may be dangerous to actively call attention to Earth.
Intelligent life
Sapience is closely related to the term "sophia" often defined as "transcendent wisdom", "ultimate reality", or the ultimate truth of things. Sapiential perspective of wisdom is said to lie in the heart of every religion, where it is often acquired through intuitive knowing. This type of wisdom is described as going beyond mere practical wisdom and includes self-knowledge, interconnectedness, conditioned origination of mind-states and other deeper understandings of subjective experience. This type of wisdom can also lead to the ability of an individual to act with appropriate judgment, a broad understanding of situations and greater appreciation/compassion towards other living beings.
transcendent
adjective
beyond or above the range of normal or merely physical human experience.
surpassing the ordinary; exceptional.
transcendent (comparative more transcendent, superlative most transcendent)
1. surpassing usual limits
2. beyond the range of usual perception
3. free from constraints of the material world
If an ET is a more advanced life form, what prevents it from being supernatural - able to break all barriers of "natural" laws - (being completely invisible etc.)?
Astrobiology
Astrobiology is a branch of biology concerned with the origins, early evolution, distribution, and future of life in the universe. Astrobiology considers the question of whether extraterrestrial life exists, and how humans can detect it if it does. The term exobiology is similar.
Astrobiology makes use of molecular biology, biophysics, biochemistry, chemistry, astronomy, exoplanetology and geology to investigate the possibility of life on other worlds and help recognize biospheres that might be different from that on Earth. The origin and early evolution of life is an inseparable part of the discipline of astrobiology. Astrobiology concerns itself with interpretation of existing scientific data, and although speculation is entertained to give context, astrobiology concerns itself primarily with hypotheses that fit firmly into existing scientific theories.
Astronomy
[*Astronomy is a natural science that studies celestial objects and phenomena.*] It applies mathematics, physics, and chemistry, in an effort to explain the origin of those objects and phenomena and their evolution. Objects of interest include planets, moons, stars, galaxies, and comets; the phenomena include supernova explosions, gamma ray bursts, and cosmic microwave background radiation. [*More generally, all phenomena that originate outside Earth's atmosphere are within the purview of astronomy. A related but distinct subject, physical cosmology, is concerned with the study of the Universe as a whole.*]
Phenomenon
A phenomenon is any thing which manifests itself. Phenomena are often, but not always, understood as "things that appear" or "experiences" for a sentient being, or in principle may be so.
The term came into its modern philosophical usage through Immanuel Kant, who contrasted it with the noumenon. In contrast to a phenomenon, a noumenon cannot be directly observed. Kant was heavily influenced by Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz in this part of his philosophy, in which phenomenon and noumenon serve as interrelated technical terms. Far predating this, the ancient Greek Pyrrhonist philosopher Sextus Empiricus also used phenomenon and noumenon as interrelated technical terms.
Scientific
[*In scientific usage, a phenomenon is any event that is observable, however common it might be, even if it requires the use of instrumentation to observe, record, or compile data concerning it. For example,
Science has developed to a point that experimental sciences are attempting to form mathematically consistent systems for predicting physical behavior. There is in many areas of physics work being done in an almost exclusively mathematical way. The ultimate value of that work is in its ability to explain and predict experimental data. But so much effort and work is being done with "pencil and paper" these days one can, if one forgets this larger context, feel that the scientific method has been forgotten.
sealchan
Well-Known Member
If an intelligent supernatural being were interacting with the Universe there might be three useful categories with respect to science in which to consider that...
The supernatural behavior is totally predictable and reproducible such that it appears to be natural
The supernatural behavior is unpredictable but reproducible such that it makes for an open question in science
The supernatural behavior is unreproducible
In all three cases science handles it by either ignoring it as a useful conjecture or leaving it as an open question. If sufficient sincere but un-reproducible reports of a phenomenon or type of event occur, then you have the following approaches
Consider it as a parapsychological subject
Consider it as a subjective psychological subject
Topics in science that address experiences of people who claim to have supernatural experiences have these two approaches.
The supernatural behavior is totally predictable and reproducible such that it appears to be natural
The supernatural behavior is unpredictable but reproducible such that it makes for an open question in science
The supernatural behavior is unreproducible
In all three cases science handles it by either ignoring it as a useful conjecture or leaving it as an open question. If sufficient sincere but un-reproducible reports of a phenomenon or type of event occur, then you have the following approaches
Consider it as a parapsychological subject
Consider it as a subjective psychological subject
Topics in science that address experiences of people who claim to have supernatural experiences have these two approaches.
Interesting way of looking at it. I can't argue against that logic.
So maybe scientists should stop limiting themselves for convenience then.
Nope. Can't happen.
"...we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door. The eminent Kant scholar Lewis Beck used to say that anyone who could believe in God could believe in anything. To appeal to an omnipotent deity is to allow that at any moment the regularities of nature may be ruptured, that miracles may happen."
Here is an interesting article http://theconversation.com/the-limi...-our-understanding-of-the-natural-world-60080
I find this reference interesting, but flawed as is the citation by Lewis Beck. There is a tendency here to pain science in an extreme materialist paradigm, which goes beyond the Methodological Naturalism philosophical view toward the possible worlds beyond the physical existence, which can be falsified by objective verifiable evidence. The problem with these extreme view is the reality is there are millions of scientists from many different philosophical and theological beliefs, and they are all on the same page, that Methodological Naturalism is neutral to philosophical and theological questions that cannot be falsified by the objective verifiable evidence
The proper perspective is that scientist justify their diversity of philosophical and theological belief 'independent' of their science, which is the dominant case. Atheist and strong agnostics must make philosophical/theological assumptions of varying 'materialist' views independent of science. This is true of the full range of belief systems to keep science independent and honest.
As for the use of logic in the justification of belief it is limited by the assumptions made in any argument, and the arguments are only valid for those that accept the assumptions.
QuestioningMind
Well-Known Member
Why are we here?
We are here because of fuel
Um... Guys what are you laughing at? Do you find that fun...
I listened to the entire talk. Interesting.
Why is our universe fine-tuned for life? | Brian Greene
If you like, you can listen to the entire talk - The excitement starts imo, at 11:12
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's not the highlight of this thread. Just thought I'd share.
Question:
Does science consider what's supernatural?
Your thoughts. Appreciate it if you say why, you answer as you do.
Hypothetical
A hypothesis (plural hypotheses) is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon. For a hypothesis to be a scientific hypothesis, the scientific method requires that one can test it. Scientists generally base scientific hypotheses on previous observations that cannot satisfactorily be explained with the available scientific theories.
Info:
supernatural
(of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature.
...is that which exists (or is claimed to exist), yet cannot be explained by laws of nature. Examples often include characteristics of or relating to ghosts, angels, gods, souls and spirits, non-material beings, or anything else considered beyond nature like magic, miracles, etc.
Over time, things once thought to be supernatural such as lightning, seasons, and human senses have been shown to have entirely naturalistic explanations and origins. Some believe that which is considered supernatural will someday be discovered to be completely physical and natural. Those who believe only the physical world exists are called naturalists. Those who believe similarly often maintain skeptical attitudes and beliefs concerning supernatural concepts.
Multiverse
Arguments against multiverse theories
In his 2003 New York Times opinion piece, "A Brief History of the Multiverse", the author and cosmologist Paul Davies offered a variety of arguments that multiverse theories are non-scientific:
For a start, how is the existence of the other universes to be tested? To be sure, all cosmologists accept that there are some regions of the universe that lie beyond the reach of our telescopes, but somewhere on the slippery slope between that and the idea that there are an infinite number of universes, credibility reaches a limit. As one slips down that slope, more and more must be accepted on faith, and less and less is open to scientific verification. Extreme multiverse explanations are therefore reminiscent of theological discussions. Indeed, invoking an infinity of unseen universes to explain the unusual features of the one we do see is just as ad hoc as invoking an unseen Creator. The multiverse theory may be dressed up in scientific language, but in essence it requires the same leap of faith.
— Paul Davies, The New York Times, "A Brief History of the Multiverse"
George Ellis, writing in August 2011, provided a criticism of the multiverse, and pointed out that it is not a traditional scientific theory. He accepts that the multiverse is thought to exist far beyond the cosmological horizon. He emphasized that it is theorized to be so far away that it's unlikely any evidence will ever be found. Ellis also explained that some theorists do not believe the lack of empirical testability falsifiability is a major concern, but he is opposed to that line of thinking:
Many physicists who talk about the multiverse, especially advocates of the string landscape, do not care much about parallel universes per se. For them, objections to the multiverse as a concept are unimportant. Their theories live or die based on internal consistency and, one hopes, eventual laboratory testing.
Ellis says that scientists have proposed the idea of the multiverse as a way of explaining the nature of existence. He points out that it ultimately leaves those questions unresolved because it is a metaphysical issue that cannot be resolved by empirical science. He argues that observational testing is at the core of science and should not be abandoned:
As skeptical as I am, I think the contemplation of the multiverse is an excellent opportunity to reflect on the nature of science and on the ultimate nature of existence: why we are here.... In looking at this concept, we need an open mind, though not too open. It is a delicate path to tread. Parallel universes may or may not exist; the case is unproved. We are going to have to live with that uncertainty. Nothing is wrong with scientifically based philosophical speculation, which is what multiverse proposals are. But we should name it for what it is.
— George Ellis, Scientific American, "Does the Multiverse Really Exist?"
Extraterrestrial life (ETs)
Extraterrestrial life, also called alien life (or, if it is a sentient or relatively complex individual, an "extraterrestrial" or "alien"), is [*life that occurs outside of Earth and that probably did not originate from Earth. These hypothetical life forms may range from simple prokaryotes to beings with civilizations far more advanced than humanity.*] The Drake equation speculates about the existence of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe. The science of extraterrestrial life in all its forms is known as exobiology.
The concept of extraterrestrial life, and [*particularly extraterrestrial intelligence*], has had a major cultural impact, chiefly in works of science fiction. Over the years, [*science fiction communicated scientific ideas, imagined a wide range of possibilities, and influenced public interest in and perspectives of extraterrestrial life.*] One shared space is the debate over the wisdom of attempting communication with extraterrestrial intelligence. Some encourage aggressive methods to try for contact with intelligent extraterrestrial life. Others—citing the tendency of technologically advanced human societies to enslave or wipe out less advanced societies—argue that it may be dangerous to actively call attention to Earth.
Intelligent life
Sapience is closely related to the term "sophia" often defined as "transcendent wisdom", "ultimate reality", or the ultimate truth of things. Sapiential perspective of wisdom is said to lie in the heart of every religion, where it is often acquired through intuitive knowing. This type of wisdom is described as going beyond mere practical wisdom and includes self-knowledge, interconnectedness, conditioned origination of mind-states and other deeper understandings of subjective experience. This type of wisdom can also lead to the ability of an individual to act with appropriate judgment, a broad understanding of situations and greater appreciation/compassion towards other living beings.
transcendent
adjective
beyond or above the range of normal or merely physical human experience.
surpassing the ordinary; exceptional.
transcendent (comparative more transcendent, superlative most transcendent)
1. surpassing usual limits
2. beyond the range of usual perception
3. free from constraints of the material world
If an ET is a more advanced life form, what prevents it from being supernatural - able to break all barriers of "natural" laws - (being completely invisible etc.)?
Asts can detect it if it does. The term exobiology is similar.
Astronomy
[*Astronomy is a natural science that studies celestial objects and phenomena.*] It applies mathematics, physics, and chemistry, in an effort to explain the origin of those objects and phenomena and their evolution. Objects of interest include planets, moons, stars, galaxies, and comets; the phenomena include supernova explosions, gamma ray bursts, and cosmic microwave background radiation. [*More generally, all phenomena that originate outside Earth's atmosphere are within the purview of astronomy. A related but distinct subject, physical cosmology, is concerned with the study of the Universe as a whole.*]
Phenomenon
A phenomenon is any thing which manifests itself. Phenomena are often, but not always, understood as "things that appear" or "experiences" for a sentient being, or in principle may be so.
The term came into its modern philosophical usage through Immanuel Kant, who contrasted it with the noumenon. In contrast to a phenomenon, a noumenon cannot be directly observed. Kant was heavily influenced by Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz in this part of his philosophy, in which phenomenon and noumenon serve as interrelated technical terms. Far predating this, the ancient Greek Pyrrhonist philosopher Sextus Empiricus also used phenomenon and noumenon as interrelated technical terms.
Scientific
[*In scientific usage, a phenomenon is any event that is observable, however common it might be, even if it requires the use of instrumentation to observe, record, or compile data concerning it. For example, in physics, a phenomenon may be described by a system of information related to matter, energy, or spacetime, such as Isaac Newton's observations of the moon's orbit and of gravity, or Galileo Galilei's observations of the motion of a pendulum.
Another example of scientific phenomena can be found in the experience of phantom limb sensations. This occurrence, the sensation of feeling in amputated limbs, is reported by over 70% of amputees. Although the limb is no longer present, they report still experiencing sensations. This is an extraordinary event that defies typical logic and has been a source of much curiosity within the medical and physiological fields.*]
Dark matter is so named because it neither absorbs nor emits light and thereforecannot be directly observed. But astronomers know dark matter exists because it interacts gravitationally with the "normal" matter we can see and touch.
Sorry about the length. I just wanted to simplify it.
Question:
Does science consider what's supernatural
This is easy. NO. By definition science is the study of the natural world. If you're proposing something that exists outside of the natural world, it is NOT within the preview of science. That's kind of like asking a mathematician to write a formula for the best flavor of ice cream.
Why are we here?
We are here because of fuel
Um... Guys what are you laughing at? Do you find that fun...
This is how I view it. The supernatural can't be tested or verified scientifically. So science can't "officially" make any determination about the supernatural.
Since none of it can be verified, it is just theories about reality which is beyond any possible testing. So in the supernatural, your theories can be as crazy or as sensible, to yourself, as you want to make them since no body could disprove anything you claim about the supernatural.
One supernatural theory or idea is as good as any other. Pick whatever you like or create your own.
So science can be mistaken, wrong. Generally the idea behind science is in attempting to disprove a theory. Folks go about trying to disprove a theory any which way they can think of. Of course it has to be disprovable in the first place. Supernatural theories by their nature can't be disproven. Something that has be tested and tried to disprove several times by several different people is then accepted as factual. It could still be proven wrong at some future date. Some smart person may find a way to disprove something that has been scientifically accepted as fact.
Personal observation and experience/feelings about a subject is not really sufficiently robust enough to accept a theory as scientific.
nPeace
Veteran Member
All three are the most um.. est.
The universe is obviously more than a few thousand years old, although created by God, imho.
Volcanoes - more specifically, the magma - could not exist if they were not created, imho.
Bacteria could not exist if they were not created. There is a balance of things for a purpose, and there is a purpose for an off balance, imho.
In the above video, I would think it very um... est, if someone were to tell me that the organ with all it's working parts, including the function of the cerumen was a product of evolution rather than purposeful design.
In fact, I would be more than eager to hear them explain it.
Do you feel obliged?
nPeace
Veteran Member
What do you think about ETs, or alien life forms, and intelligence? Do you think they should be included, since in theory they could fall into the category of supernatural, imo - based on certain proposed ideas?
nPeace
Veteran Member
How do you determine supernatural?
As said
Where is the line drawn on the supernatural?
nPeace
Veteran Member
So, where/how would you say ETs fit into this?
nPeace
Veteran Member
So would you say then, that ETs, and multiverses, and the fuel said to give birth to these, would fall into the category of supernatural?
exchemist
Veteran Member
What is an ET and what fuel are you talking about?
nPeace
Veteran Member
I don't think I am blaming anyone. I'm just trying to get the picture in clear perspective. Hence the questions.
nPeace
Veteran Member
Oh, you didn't watch the video. That okay. ETs - extraterrestrials.
exchemist
Veteran Member
There is no evidence yet for ETs, so they are imaginative hypotheses. But not supernatural, since if there are any they would be expected to conform to the laws of nature, like anything else.
But what is this about fuel?
nPeace
Veteran Member
What if there is no detection, should they probe based on a hunch?