|
On September 02 2015 00:22 Ketara wrote:
I've definitely experienced some "paranormal" things in life.
I think there's things in the world that modern science can't explain. Ghosts or magic or whatever has never been scientifically proven, but its also never been scientifically disproven, and just because there's tons of bullshit and hoaxes and whatever doesn't mean there isn't some real shit underlying it all too. There's lots of stuff all over the world that isn't properly explainable or understood.
So my attitude towards those things is like, if somebody says they can explain or prove supernatural stuff to you, they're full of shit. But at the same time, if somebody says supernatural things definitely don't exist, they're probably a little closed minded.
Just because something isn't currently explainable doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Lots of things that aren't explainable? I feel people that believe in supernatural crap like throwing that out there but what basis does it have? We have a pretty good understanding of the macro level stuff, anything that we don't know for certain mostly follows principles we have come up with or there's an explanation we can gather but no one has bothered proving it. The universe is a pretty logical place. Us not understanding something doesn't mean it's "supernatural", it just means our understanding is flawed.
Reality is pretty interesting and cool place. No reason to live in the realm of fairy tales.
|
You guys should play Umineko.
|
Yeah I am absolute wuss when it comes to scary things, like tbh, I even get creeped out playing stuff like Resident Evil, let alone actual scary stuff.
|
All the word supernatural means is something that isn't currently understood by science.
So I'm not sure why it's a poor definition. There's lots of supernatural shit in the universe. Dark matter is supernatural. Once we understand it it will no longer be supernatural and will become natural. Hundreds of years ago lightning and earthquakes were supernatural, now they are not.
Here's an example of something that's real and currently supernatural.
There are Buddhist monks in Tibet who can raise their body temperature during meditation so much that it should kill them. But it doesn't kill them, and it's well documented that they can do this, but scientists have been studying it since what the 80s and have no fucking clue how they're doing it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tummo
http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/2002/04.18/09-tummo.html
Hell, Buddhists have been meditating for over 2000 years and we just scientifically proved that meditation builds gray matter in the brain a month ago.
There's a lot of stuff in the world that science hasn't properly explained yet.
|
i only get scared when i have to close my eyes in the shower and my mind wanders to the creepy stories i read/pictures i saw recently
|
On September 02 2015 00:22 ComaDose wrote:
I've never heard of or seen anything that couldn't be explained rationally. Sure we have documented only like 20% or something of the species on earth but I dont think the missing ones are large mamals/ness monsters. Its unfortunate but most likely that our consciousness dies when our bodies stop being able to power our brains. I cant really fathom a way it could create some kind of undocumented energy that retains our consciousness but is not observable except in creepy settings.
I hope before I die science comes up with a less organic/faulty method of keeping my consciousness powered. or being able to copy it chappie style. It should be theoretically possible to map out every neural connection and duplicate it in software with enough powerful catscans / computing power right? and why in chappie did the original bodie die / get powered down when it was copied? that bothered me should have kept it living. then I could have two of me and we could double team my gf and i could stay home and play video games while i went to work. id even be willing to take turns. If I had the technology at home then plural I could update plural my consciousness by rebasing them both on top of each other and that way id be able to continue my work as if i had done it yesterday. whoaaaa
If I agree with you, does that make us horrible narcisists?
But it would be cool. But the living cost would also go up...
|
Supernatural definitions generally all have to do with being out of the laws of the universe or attributed to some deity. The definition that it's merely not currently understood is very specific cherry picking. As for your meditation, calling that supernatural is stretching the definition so far you might as well use another word at that point. Calling Dark matter supernatural is ever worse.
Here's an extract from the journal linked in that wiki page: The findings indicate that there are two factors affecting temperature increase.The first is the somatic component which causes thermogenesis, while the second is the neurocognitive component (meditative visualization) that aids in sustaining temperature increases for longer periods.
Sounds like people know exactly what is going on? Can't find any source saying it's unexplained. Just a lot of people trying to prove it exists. I think you need to understand something about science. It's very hard to prove a model or concept. We can figure out what is the most likely thing happening but to actually go and prove without a doubt that that is what is happening is far harder. Things to do with the human body are even harder to prove as well the best method to prove things is hardly humane.
|
On September 02 2015 00:51 Duvon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2015 00:22 ComaDose wrote:
I've never heard of or seen anything that couldn't be explained rationally. Sure we have documented only like 20% or something of the species on earth but I dont think the missing ones are large mamals/ness monsters. Its unfortunate but most likely that our consciousness dies when our bodies stop being able to power our brains. I cant really fathom a way it could create some kind of undocumented energy that retains our consciousness but is not observable except in creepy settings.
I hope before I die science comes up with a less organic/faulty method of keeping my consciousness powered. or being able to copy it chappie style. It should be theoretically possible to map out every neural connection and duplicate it in software with enough powerful catscans / computing power right? and why in chappie did the original bodie die / get powered down when it was copied? that bothered me should have kept it living. then I could have two of me and we could double team my gf and i could stay home and play video games while i went to work. id even be willing to take turns. If I had the technology at home then plural I could update plural my consciousness by rebasing them both on top of each other and that way id be able to continue my work as if i had done it yesterday. whoaaaa If I agree with you, does that make us horrible narcisists? But it would be cool. But the living cost would also go up...
I dont think not wanting to cease to exist is narcissistic. I don't think im that great overall I'm just kinda selfish i guess. i suppose there would only be one fleshy host of my consciousness and i would be bummed when it died but i would be able to attend my own organic consciousness supporter burying ceremony 
we already had a conversation once where some of us agreed we would like to live thousands of years but not forever. also gotta keep hoping humanity will live longer than the earth.
|
Czech Republic11293 Posts
On September 02 2015 00:39 Ketara wrote:All the word supernatural means is something that isn't currently understood by science. So I'm not sure why it's a poor definition. There's lots of supernatural shit in the universe. Dark matter is supernatural. Once we understand it it will no longer be supernatural and will become natural. Hundreds of years ago lightning and earthquakes were supernatural, now they are not. Here's an example of something that's real and currently supernatural. There are Buddhist monks in Tibet who can raise their body temperature during meditation so much that it should kill them. But it doesn't kill them, and it's well documented that they can do this, but scientists have been studying it since what the 80s and have no fucking clue how they're doing it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tummohttp://news.harvard.edu/gazette/2002/04.18/09-tummo.htmlHell, Buddhists have been meditating for over 2000 years and we just scientifically proved that meditation builds gray matter in the brain a month ago. There's a lot of stuff in the world that science hasn't properly explained yet.
I don't think supernatural means what you think it means
supernatural comes from the words super+nature and it means something that is above (the laws of) nature. Supernatural claims existed even before science as it is was created and it doesn't have much to do with it. Earthquakes and lightning were considered supernatural but never were. People only thought they were because of a mix of ignorance about the phenomenons and some combinations of intellectual dishonesty, lack of understanding of philosophy etc., I'm not going to burn Greeks too hard that they thought lightning was sent down by Zeus because they really knew so little but even with no knowledge that's not the most reasonable assumption.
also LOL Ketara if you're trying to make an assertion as ridiculous as "it's unexplainable" you'll need a lot better fucking reason than "I can't explain it".
@req by "getting ripped a new one" I meant people are going to laugh at you.
|
Sounds to me like you're debating semantics and not my point .
Supernatural means not according to the laws of nature / the universe / physics / whatever. Those laws are constantly changing and updated as we understand them better, and as we do so, things that are currently supernatural cease being supernatural and become natural.
If you just want to say that nothing is supernatural because everything is explainable with enough understanding and we don't have that understanding, that's fine, but then you're agreeing with my statement while arguing the word choice.
|
Czech Republic11293 Posts
As far as we can tell the laws aren't changing, just our understanding of them is. I'm sorry but that is a massive fucking distinction and you should really make sure that you understand it.
also doesn't excuse you from calling something unexplainable
|
On September 02 2015 01:00 Ketara wrote:Sounds to me like you're debating semantics and not my point . Supernatural means not according to the laws of nature / the universe / physics / whatever. Those laws are constantly changing and updated as we understand them better, and as we do so, things that are currently supernatural cease being supernatural and become natural.
+ Show Spoiler +su·per·nat·u·ral (so͞o′pər-năch′ər-əl)
adj.
1. Of or relating to existence outside the natural world.
2. Attributed to a power that seems to violate or go beyond natural forces.
3. Of or relating to a deity.
4. Of or relating to the immediate exercise of divine power; miraculous.
5. Of or relating to the miraculous.
adjective
1.
of, relating to, or being above or beyond what is natural; unexplainable by natural law or phenomena; abnormal.
2.
of, pertaining to, characteristic of, or attributed to God or a deity.
3.
of a superlative degree; preternatural:
a missile of supernatural speed.
4.
of, relating to, or attributed to ghosts, goblins, or other unearthly beings; eerie; occult.
of or relating to an order of existence beyond the visible observable universe; especially : of or relating to God or a god, demigod, spirit, or devil
2
a : departing from what is usual or normal especially so as to appear to transcend the laws of nature
b : attributed to an invisible agent (as a ghost or spirit)
(Of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature:
a supernatural being
Those are the first 4 sets of definitions from different dictionaries I could find. I think your definition of supernatural is incredibly warped. Supernatural is about things outside of the laws of the universe, not something outside of our understanding but inside of the universal laws.
Dark matter so far is hypothetical but we were able to prove it's existence then it would fall under the universal laws. We believe it should exist and have theories but again trying to prove things in science is incredibly hard.
|
Czech Republic11293 Posts
Like look ketara you can use words in ways nobody else does but then don't be surprised when people think you're weak in the head
|
Most of those definitions are 100% in line with how I used it wtf.
Only the ones that talk about dieties or goblins aren't. You guys are just biased against the word because you think only crazy people talking about ouija boards and alien abductions are supposed to use it.
|
United States47024 Posts
On September 02 2015 01:00 Ketara wrote:Sounds to me like you're debating semantics and not my point .
I mean, it's important to lay down the terms of the discussion, because I think you and Numy might actually agree in principle, it's just based on the terms, you're creating an argument out of nothing.
You're arguing that the term "supernatural" refers to perceptions. What is supernatural is what is perceived to be supernatural/not currently explainable. And so, based on that use of the term, then yes, there are plenty of supernatural things.
Numy's understanding of the term is that it refers to reality--what is supernatural isn't just what we currently cannot explain, but must be something that is fundamentally unexplainable by science or a rational understanding of the world. And so, his position that there aren't supernatural things is a fair position, but also not directly opposed to yours.
|
well i think like more than half the world is crazy and not using it when they should.
dark matter does not conflict/act outside the laws of nature it is not supernatural. its just undiscovered/documented.
|
Ok this is ridiculous. According to your definition this situation would be supernatural:
There's a certain step in the diesel process called Fischer–Tropsch process. What it does isn't important but within that process there's a catalyst that is requires. One scientist figured out which is the best catalyst by brute forcing it(He tested them all lol) but for years we couldn't figure out why on earth this catalyst was the best. That there would be beyond our scientific understanding and thus Supernatural. Eventually our micro level understanding caught up and now we know why it's good which now makes it no longer supernatural.
On September 02 2015 01:11 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2015 01:00 Ketara wrote:Sounds to me like you're debating semantics and not my point . I mean, it's important to lay down the terms of the discussion, because I think you and Numy might actually agree in principle, it's just based on the terms, you're creating an argument out of nothing. You're arguing that the term "supernatural" refers to perceptions. What is supernatural is what is perceived to be supernatural/not currently explainable. And so, based on that use of the term, then yes, there are plenty of supernatural things. Numy's understanding of the term is that it refers to reality--what is supernatural isn't just what we currently cannot explain, but must be something that is fundamentally unexplainable by science or a rational understanding of the world. And so, his position that there aren't supernatural things is a fair position, but also not directly opposed to yours.
Yes. If the word merely refers to perception than if there was ever a situation where something is fundamentally different from the world we would require a new word for it.
|
You say "it's supernatural because it's ouside our laws!"
Doesn't work like that. We don't say "it's not in the natural laws" but "we don't which law (that we may or may not know of at the moment) it falls under", meaning we do consider it natural.
And if you're talking about ghosts, sure we can't explain ghosts, but we can point out that the phenomenon you call "ghosts" is something else, which we can explain.
|
On September 02 2015 01:12 Numy wrote:
Ok this is ridiculous. According to your definition this situation would be supernatural:
There's a certain step in the diesel process called Fischer–Tropsch process. What it does isn't important but within that process there's a catalyst that is requires. One scientist figured out which is the best catalyst by brute forcing it(He tested them all lol) but for years we couldn't figure out why on earth this catalyst was the best. That there would be beyond our scientific understanding and thus Supernatural.
I have plenty of code that works supernaturally
I just put lines in that shouldn't do anything but it works and I can't figure out the fucking logic of the engine so I just leave it and hope it doesn't break. A good portion of my software runs on magic and hope.
|
United States47024 Posts
On September 02 2015 01:03 Numy wrote:
2. Attributed to a power that seems to violate or go beyond natural forces.
1. of, relating to, or being above or beyond what is natural; unexplainable by natural law or phenomena; abnormal.
These are the two definitions that are relevant to the ambiguity/disagreement.
A loose reading of either of these would lead to Ketara's understanding of the term (seeing as neither specifies whether the term distinguishes between what's currently unexplainable by human knowledge or what's fundamentally unexplainable by science/rational thinking at a basic level).
On September 02 2015 01:14 Requizen wrote:
I have plenty of code that works supernaturally
I just put lines in that shouldn't do anything but it works and I can't figure out the fucking logic of the engine so I just leave it and hope it doesn't break. A good portion of my software runs on magic and hope.
I figured someone would say this one eventually, lol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
