Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Studying the supernatural
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 1 of 207 (634641)
09-22-2011 2:00 PM


This topic has been at the fringe, and sometimes the focus, of a number of debates here. Apologies to those who are weary of it, as acknowledgement of this fact I have attempted to tie things in with the EvC theme this forum is intended for. If preferred, I'll add this to an open thread.

Can science even investigate the supernatural?


There are of course two broad possible answers to the question posed by this debate. There are others, I'll leave those as an exercise for the student.
  1. Intrinsically, no
    Science studies the natural and so by definition can not investigate the supernatural. This seems like a reasonable position enough to take, Stephen J. Gould formulated famously as Non-Overlapping MAgisteria.
    quote:
    But I also know that souls represent a subject outside the magisterium of science. My world cannot prove or disprove such a notion, and the concept of souls cannot threaten or impact my domain.
    This is certainly a valid way of defining things. Science studies a set domain and if something existed out of this domain then science cannot study it.
    Of course, it may be true that such a domain exists, but that is only so because it has been defined that evidence and reason cannot be employed in ruling it out...and that's the only way we know how to reliably rule things out.
    The problem with this - if it weren't apparent - is that, if it were true that the scientific method cannot be applied, then how can anyone know anything about the supernatural? One can invoke alternative ways of knowing than the scientific method such as through appeals to personal experience, of course, and this has been done considerably in other threads.
    For instance, I know I own a cat. This isn't because science has studied the cat and confirmed its existence. And the argument goes that I know I own a cat because I experience the cat personally. Even if I lived alone and had no visitors I could still say I know I own a cat.
    So surely then, if I can know I have a cat - with no evidence but my own personal experiences of the cat, we can know a god with no evidence but our own personal experiences of the god.
    So goes the argument, to boil it down.
  2. Yes, of course
    Here I find myself allying with creationists. What joyous times!
    The thing is, science investigates what can detected. It doesn't care whether the thing being detected is metaphysically natural or metaphysically supernatural. Science is a methodology for investigations.
    Our ancestors may survive in some supernatural realm detectable only to spirit mediums. If that is so, then by definition science can say nothing except that people lie, or can be delusional and that such theories are evidentially supported.
    On the other hand, ghosts may exist. And these are detectable. Whether it be by sight, sound, or maybe vibrating at frequencies above visible light. Whatever, if they can be detected science can confirm their existence.
    Most people would be happy to call a ghost supernatural, but if the Intrinsically, no people insist then it must be that ghosts are actually natural phenomena in this setup.
    And this is where creationists and I agree. After all, most of them believe that science will ultimately vindicate everything they've said. To them, science is still the study of God's creation and through it, we can prove God's imminent existence. Where we disagree is the current status of that situation: They think we're getting there, some even think we're there now.
    Since the large part of the creationist position is premised on the notion that a set of supernatural events occurred that can be evidenced in a scientific context, we should not adhere to the strict non-overlapping understanding of the supernatural in the context of EvC.
In conclusion
If debate is to be meaningful we have to grant that it is possible to infer some information about the supernatural based on its natural effects. There are some supernatural propositions which have very subtle or no natural effects. These maybe impossible, or impractically difficult for science to study, indeed they are as impossible as those that construct them intend for them to be.
But not all constructs that are deemed 'supernatural' are necessarily closed to science to study. For all we know, the supernatural realm may follow certain regularities or laws that can be inferred from the natural. In which case, science will expand its borders without worrying about the philosophical objections people might throw up.
And herein lies my final argument: If the 'Intrinsically, no' people are right - there is no way they can know they are right. Their only source of information about this realm is via a detection system that we know is prone to false positives (the human mind), with little to no capacity for corroboration. Furthermore, if they are right, they have no way of knowing if gods, ghosts, djinn or domovoi are in fact supernatural beings.
Science studies experienced phenomena (whether direct or indirect experience). If the supernatural can be experienced, science can study it. Even if it means paradigm shifting upheavals. If the supernatural cannot be experienced, science can still study entities that are commonly called supernatural - but the Intrinsically, no people will just insist they are natural.

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-23-2011 10:13 AM Modulous has replied
 Message 5 by Panda, posted 09-23-2011 10:40 AM Modulous has seen this message but not replied
 Message 7 by nwr, posted 09-23-2011 10:53 AM Modulous has replied
 Message 75 by GDR, posted 09-25-2011 10:57 AM Modulous has seen this message but not replied
 Message 101 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-27-2011 12:55 PM Modulous has replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 2 of 207 (634643)
09-23-2011 8:14 AM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the Studying the supernatural thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(3)
Message 3 of 207 (634666)
09-23-2011 10:13 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Modulous
09-22-2011 2:00 PM


For instance, I know I own a cat. This isn't because science has studied the cat and confirmed its existence. And the argument goes that I know I own a cat because I experience the cat personally. Even if I lived alone and had no visitors I could still say I know I own a cat.
So surely then, if I can know I have a cat - with no evidence but my own personal experiences of the cat, we can know a god with no evidence but our own personal experiences of the god.
Well, a couple of points. First, you say that science hasn't confirmed the existence of the cat. Yes it has. You have made observations consistent with the hypothesis that you have a cat. It doesn't matter that while you did this you were not wearing a white coat and employed as a Professor of Cat Recognition.
Second, if there was ever any doubt as to whether you actually have a cat or whether you merely have persistent illusions of a cat, you could and would ask someone else; you wouldn't have to rely on your personal experiences.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Modulous, posted 09-22-2011 2:00 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Modulous, posted 09-23-2011 11:13 AM Dr Adequate has replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1503 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 4 of 207 (634670)
09-23-2011 10:40 AM


How can we confirm the existence of that which defies study.
Science deals with objective truths. If something is inmaterial how can it be examined? If something is not composed of matter how can it be studied? Yes psycology and social sciences can study ideas and such, but I am speaking about ghost and spirits.
There has not been one single shred of physical evidence to suggest such things exist that has not been debunked as clap trap. Dr. Randi even has a standing one million dollar offer for anyone who can produce such evidence.

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Straggler, posted 09-23-2011 10:52 AM 1.61803 has replied
 Message 14 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-23-2011 12:07 PM 1.61803 has seen this message but not replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3712 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 5 of 207 (634671)
09-23-2011 10:40 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Modulous
09-22-2011 2:00 PM


Modulous writes:
The thing is, science investigates what can detected. It doesn't care whether the thing being detected is metaphysically natural or metaphysically supernatural. Science is a methodology for investigations.
Also, if a supernatural being was able to affect the natural world, then we could study these effects.
Granted, we would not be able to draw many conclusions, but we could study these 'occurrences'.
e.g.
If the FSM turned chickens into intelligent mammals over-night then we could definitely study these changes.
quote:
Can science even investigate the supernatural?
If you consider "studying the effects of a supernatural being" to be the same as "studying a supernatural being" then I would answer: yes.
Being able to differentiate between "natural effects" and "supernatural effects" would be difficult, though.
I expect we would require something as sudden and as impossible as the chicken example above.

Always remember: QUIDQUID LATINE DICTUM SIT ALTUM VIDITUR
Science flies you into space; religion flies you into buildings.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Modulous, posted 09-22-2011 2:00 PM Modulous has seen this message but not replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 6 of 207 (634672)
09-23-2011 10:52 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by 1.61803
09-23-2011 10:40 AM


Numbers writes:
If something is inmaterial how can it be examined? If something is not composed of matter how can it be studied?
If something is immaterial how can it be experienced at all? Have you heard of the mind body problem?
Numbers writes:
Yes psycology and social sciences can study ideas and such.....
If something cannot be experienced how can any concept of it be derived from anywhere but the internal workings of a creative brain?
Numbers writes:
...but I am speaking about ghost and spirits.
Are these ghosts and spirits detectable? If so how? Can they be seen? Touched? Heard?
Numbers writes:
How can we confirm the existence of that which defies study. Science deals with objective truths.
Science deals with detectable reality. Our investigations into detectable reality show us that humans will invoke "unknowable" beings and then start claiming to know various things about them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by 1.61803, posted 09-23-2011 10:40 AM 1.61803 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by 1.61803, posted 09-23-2011 11:40 AM Straggler has replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


(2)
Message 7 of 207 (634674)
09-23-2011 10:53 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Modulous
09-22-2011 2:00 PM


Can science even investigate the supernatural?

Yes, of course science can investigate the supernatural.
The thing is that when science investigate and explains the supernatural, it calls the result "natural." So the effect is to diminish what is considered supernatural, and to increase what is considered natural.
Much that was once in the province of supernatural religion is now natural. If the religions were smart, they would embrace the natural and declare that their God is nature itself. However, they instead continue to insist on a supernatural God, and their God is being diminished as science moves areas from the mysterious supernatural to the understood natural.

Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Modulous, posted 09-22-2011 2:00 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Straggler, posted 09-23-2011 11:20 AM nwr has seen this message but not replied
 Message 19 by RAZD, posted 09-23-2011 1:44 PM nwr has replied
 Message 30 by Modulous, posted 09-23-2011 4:07 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 8 of 207 (634677)
09-23-2011 11:13 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Dr Adequate
09-23-2011 10:13 AM


Well, a couple of points. First, you say that science hasn't confirmed the existence of the cat. Yes it has. You have made observations consistent with the hypothesis that you have a cat. It doesn't matter that while you did this you were not wearing a white coat and employed as a Professor of Cat Recognition.
I was presenting my opponents position in the strongest terms I could. I think I covered this point when I put my own position forward viz., "The thing is, science investigates what can detected...Science is a methodology for investigations. "
I was more thorough in my first draft, but my first draft was three times longer than the final product. I have to leave something to debate, right?
Second, if there was ever any doubt as to whether you actually have a cat or whether you merely have persistent illusions of a cat, you could and would ask someone else;
Precisely the point I was hoping to be able to make. Furthermore, there is independent evidence that cat's exist and that people own them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-23-2011 10:13 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-23-2011 5:41 PM Modulous has seen this message but not replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 9 of 207 (634679)
09-23-2011 11:20 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by nwr
09-23-2011 10:53 AM


Nwr writes:
Much that was once in the province of supernatural religion is now natural.
Can you give an example?
Because I really don't buy this whole "supernatural is just what hasn't been explained by science yet" malarky that you seem to be implying.
For example - You could say that thunder and lightning was once supernatural and now isn't. I suppose. But that really doesn't do service to the explanation put forward on either side.
For example - Thor as the conceptual cause of this phenomenon remains as conceptually supernatural as ever. And nothing science discovers will change that. Science doesn't make Thor natural. Science makes the supernatural explanation that is Thor redundant.
Likewise it isn't the case that build up of electric static electric charge in clouds was once "supernatural" and is now "natural". This explanation is and always has been natural. It's just those who believed in Thor (or whoever) were (understandably) ignorant of such things.
So my answer to "can we investigate the supernatural and how" is this - We investigate nature and where we find highly evidenced naturalistic alternatives to supernatural explanations we consider the supernatural explanation refuted to all practical intents and purposes.
If however the supernatural explanation is borne out (i.e. we examine the Sun and it really is a Golden Armored being unbounded by the laws of physics riding a flaming chariot across the sky) then we acknowledge that there is actually a basis for such concepts.
As yet no such evidence for any such entity has ever been forthcoming.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by nwr, posted 09-23-2011 10:53 AM nwr has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Percy, posted 09-23-2011 1:52 PM Straggler has replied
 Message 43 by Chuck77, posted 09-24-2011 7:01 AM Straggler has replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1503 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 10 of 207 (634683)
09-23-2011 11:40 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Straggler
09-23-2011 10:52 AM


Strag writes:
If something is immaterial how can it be experienced at all? Have you heard of the mind body problem?
Yes..and have you heard of dreaming? You experience your dreams do you not? OKthen.
Strag writes:
If something cannot be experienced how can any concept of it be derived from anywhere but the internal workings of a creative brain?
I agree.
Strag writes:
Are these ghosts and spirits detectable? If so how? Can they be seen? Touched? Heard?
Yes, it seems there are those among us that are privy to experiencing the supernatural. Just watch the show Ghost Hunters. roflmao
Strag writes:
Science deals with detectable reality. Our investigations into detectable reality show us that humans will invoke "unknowable" beings and then start claiming to know various things about them.
Blink....did you just say "know" Blink...really...you did, didnt you you said the K word.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Straggler, posted 09-23-2011 10:52 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Straggler, posted 09-23-2011 11:47 AM 1.61803 has replied
 Message 12 by Panda, posted 09-23-2011 11:49 AM 1.61803 has seen this message but not replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 11 of 207 (634684)
09-23-2011 11:47 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by 1.61803
09-23-2011 11:40 AM


Numbers writes:
Yes, it seems there are those among us that are privy to experiencing the supernatural.
How are they detecting the supernatural?
Straggler writes:
If something is immaterial how can it be experienced at all? Have you heard of the mind body problem?
Numbers writes:
Yes..and have you heard of dreaming? You experience your dreams do you not?
I experience all sorts of things that are the result of the internal workings of my physical brain with little relevance to external reality. But these don't really have anything to do with the mind body problem as applied to humans claiming to have detected immaterial supernatural entities.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by 1.61803, posted 09-23-2011 11:40 AM 1.61803 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by 1.61803, posted 09-23-2011 11:56 AM Straggler has replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3712 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 12 of 207 (634686)
09-23-2011 11:49 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by 1.61803
09-23-2011 11:40 AM


Are you sure?
1.61803 writes:
Blink....did you just say "know" Blink...really...you did, didnt you you said the K word.
Aah...but you don't 'know' he used the 'K' word.
You only know he "Knows" that you know that he knows, don't 'cha know.

Always remember: QUIDQUID LATINE DICTUM SIT ALTUM VIDITUR
Science flies you into space; religion flies you into buildings.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by 1.61803, posted 09-23-2011 11:40 AM 1.61803 has seen this message but not replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1503 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 13 of 207 (634687)
09-23-2011 11:56 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by Straggler
09-23-2011 11:47 AM


Staggler, I really do not know that I believe they are in fact detecting the supernatural. And neither do you for that matter.
However.....there are those who say big foot exist somewhere in the woods of North America. Is Big Foot supernatural?
There are those who say Aliens are making anal probes on human specimens. Are Aliens supernatural?
And of course those who say ghost exist, are ghost supernatural?
We defined a zillion times on this board what we all say is supernatural. We all agree that a the supernatural is that which exist outside of the laws of this natural universe. Which imo means it does not exist. If ghost exist they are natural imo. We just as of yet do not have a way of explaining them that coincides with what we know up to this point. Or its bull shit. Take your pick.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Straggler, posted 09-23-2011 11:47 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by Modulous, posted 09-23-2011 12:09 PM 1.61803 has seen this message but not replied
 Message 16 by Straggler, posted 09-23-2011 12:16 PM 1.61803 has seen this message but not replied
 Message 17 by RAZD, posted 09-23-2011 1:01 PM 1.61803 has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 14 of 207 (634690)
09-23-2011 12:07 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by 1.61803
09-23-2011 10:40 AM


Science deals with objective truths. If something is inmaterial how can it be examined? If something is not composed of matter how can it be studied?
Well, I could part the Red Sea for you.
Dr. Randi even has a standing one million dollar offer for anyone who can produce such evidence.
Quite so --- but that's exactly because there are supernatural things that could be examined and studied if they were real. If I could read your mind or levitate or foretell the future or whatever, I could prove it and get the million dollars.
The whole point of him offering the prize is not that in principle the supernatural is undemonstrable, so he can always get out of paying, but rather that in practice the supernatural is undemonstrable, 'cos of not being real, so that he will in fact never have to pay.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by 1.61803, posted 09-23-2011 10:40 AM 1.61803 has seen this message but not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 15 of 207 (634691)
09-23-2011 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by 1.61803
09-23-2011 11:56 AM


We all agree that a the supernatural is that which exist outside of the laws of this natural universe.
No we don't. See the OP for a counterexample to this universal.
And of course those who say ghost exist, are ghost supernatural?
If you are in the 'intrinsically, no' crowd - the answer must necessarily be 'I don't know and I can never know'
If you are in the 'yes, of course' crowd, then yes ghosts are supernatural but they are potentially studyable.
If ghost exist they are natural imo.
I believed I called that shot in the OP, too

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by 1.61803, posted 09-23-2011 11:56 AM 1.61803 has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024