|
On September 02 2015 01:14 Alaric wrote:
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.
I dunno, it's like, on one hand, I understand all the logical reasoning. And I've never experienced anything supernatural, as I've said, so I have no reason to believe that there are things that exist outside the realm of reality.
But it would be exciting, wouldn't it?
|
On September 02 2015 01:14 Requizen wrote:Show nested quote +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.
yeah i get too many of those too which are extra painful when the diff doesnt explain what changed either
what is the most common language used in programming these days? + Show Spoiler +
|
Look at it this way.
If you went back in time 1000 years and asked somebody how lightning works, and they said it was supernatural.
They wouldn't be using the word improperly.
|
On September 02 2015 01:17 ComaDose wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2015 01:14 Requizen wrote: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. yeah i get too many of those too which are extra painful when the diff doesnt explain what changed either what is the most common language used in programming these days? + Show Spoiler +
Common is pretty dependent on a lot of things. Most big companies use Microsoft, and C#.NET seems to be the leader by far from what I've seen. Visual Basic is still around, and F# is becoming a thing if you like functional programming (though I don't know if it'll take off just yet).
Java is pretty popular in other places. Being open source is a big boon to indie companies and startups. I don't particularly like it.
That's all back end stuff, though. Front end isn't my forte, I know some CSS, HTML, PHP, and Javascript, but not enough to be a pro. I dunno what scripting stuff is big right now. Python/Perl/Ruby? I heard there are some other ones but I don't use them in my line of work so I don't keep up with it.
And of course SQL and Oracle for databases.
|
On September 02 2015 01:19 Ketara wrote:
Look at it this way.
If you went back in time 1000 years and asked somebody how lightning works, and they said it was supernatural.
They wouldn't be using the word improperly.
Yes they would be. Perceiving something as supernatural does not make it supernatural.
|
On September 02 2015 01:20 Requizen wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2015 01:17 ComaDose wrote:On September 02 2015 01:14 Requizen wrote: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. yeah i get too many of those too which are extra painful when the diff doesnt explain what changed either what is the most common language used in programming these days? + Show Spoiler + Common is pretty dependent on a lot of things. Most big companies use Microsoft, and C#.NET seems to be the leader by far from what I've seen. Visual Basic is still around, and F# is becoming a thing if you like functional programming (though I don't know if it'll take off just yet). Java is pretty popular in other places. Being open source is a big boon to indie companies and startups. I don't particularly like it. That's all back end stuff, though. Front end isn't my forte, I know some CSS, HTML, PHP, and Javascript, but not enough to be a pro. I dunno what scripting stuff is big right now. Python/Perl/Ruby? I heard there are some other ones but I don't use them in my line of work so I don't keep up with it. And of course SQL and Oracle for databases.
I can't tell if you are being pedantic as a joke or you didn't click the spoiler to reveal the answer i provided.
I mean those people would believe it is supernatural. but they would be wrong.
|
On September 02 2015 01:23 ComaDose wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2015 01:20 Requizen wrote:On September 02 2015 01:17 ComaDose wrote:On September 02 2015 01:14 Requizen wrote: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. yeah i get too many of those too which are extra painful when the diff doesnt explain what changed either what is the most common language used in programming these days? + Show Spoiler + Common is pretty dependent on a lot of things. Most big companies use Microsoft, and C#.NET seems to be the leader by far from what I've seen. Visual Basic is still around, and F# is becoming a thing if you like functional programming (though I don't know if it'll take off just yet). Java is pretty popular in other places. Being open source is a big boon to indie companies and startups. I don't particularly like it. That's all back end stuff, though. Front end isn't my forte, I know some CSS, HTML, PHP, and Javascript, but not enough to be a pro. I dunno what scripting stuff is big right now. Python/Perl/Ruby? I heard there are some other ones but I don't use them in my line of work so I don't keep up with it. And of course SQL and Oracle for databases. I can't tell if you are being pedantic as a joke or you didn't click the spoiler to reveal the answer i provided.
I didn't click -.-
SHAME
|
If that's what you think then I feel like your standpoint by necessity has to be that it's a word that cannot be properly used in any context ever.
|
United States47024 Posts
On September 02 2015 01:19 Ketara wrote:
Look at it this way.
If you went back in time 1000 years and asked somebody how lightning works, and they said it was supernatural.
They wouldn't be using the word improperly.
They'd say it was supernatural because they genuinely believed it was supernatural in Numy's use of the word though. The concept of the scientific method or a rational approach to investigating natural phenomena practically didn't exist yet.
Once you start talking about how people approached the idea of "supernatural" after the basic principles of empirical science were developed, there's a rather drastic change.
|
I just wanted people to post spooky stories, not argue.
This has gone all wrong. All wrong.
|
Way to act like Wave, Requizen.
|
On September 02 2015 01:24 Ketara wrote:
If that's what you think then I feel like your standpoint by necessity has to be that it's a word that cannot be properly used in any context ever.
sure it can. science fiction, horror, religion, pretty much anything outside of logical reasoning
|
United States47024 Posts
On September 02 2015 01:24 Ketara wrote:
If that's what you think then I feel like your standpoint by necessity has to be that it's a word that cannot be properly used in any context ever.
Ok, Ketara, so what is your answer to the following question:
"Do you believe that there exist phenomena within the universe that are fundamentally unexplainable by science and rational thinking because they exist outside the governance of the natural laws of the universe?"
Because if the answer is yes, then you believe that the supernatural exists. And a whole lot of people in the world would answer yes to that question.
|
But you could just as easily be like "If God exists then the natural laws of the universe are actually just that God says so, therefor acts of God are not supernatural as they are not defying natural laws of the universe."
|
United States47024 Posts
On September 02 2015 01:32 Ketara wrote:
But you could just as easily be like "If God exists then the natural laws of the universe are actually just that God says so, therefor acts of God are not supernatural as they are not defying natural laws of the universe."
Well no "arbitrary being X says so" falls outside the realm of "science and rational thinking" because the whims of an arbitrary entity are inherently not rational.
|
What I am saying is that everybody is agreeing on the definition of Supernatural, IE something which is behaving outside the natural laws of the universe.
What we are disagreeing on is the definition of natural laws of the universe as either being something of absolute truth, or something of currently perceived truth.
If you believe that "natural laws of the universe" refers to something of absolute truth, then by necessity the word supernatural cannot be correctly used in any context ever, because everything that happens ever is abiding by the natural laws of the universe.
|
On September 02 2015 01:32 Ketara wrote:
But you could just as easily be like "If God exists then the natural laws of the universe are actually just that God says so, therefor acts of God are not supernatural as they are not defying natural laws of the universe."
Yes there's a line of Christianity that believes that. I can't think of what it's called but basically they believe that all the miracles Jesus/God produced are entirely within the realm of science/understanding. but people at the time were ignorant so believed that they were something divine.
On September 02 2015 01:35 Ketara wrote:
What I am saying is that everybody is agreeing on the definition of Supernatural, IE something which is behaving outside the natural laws of the universe.
What we are disagreeing on is the definition of natural laws of the universe as either being something of absolute truth, or something of currently perceived truth.
If you believe that "natural laws of the universe" refers to something of absolute truth, then by necessity the word supernatural cannot be correctly used in any context ever, because everything that happens ever is abiding by the natural laws of the universe.
No everyone but you agrees on one way to use the word. Also the word Supernatural can be used. If something falls outside of the laws of the universe than it's supernatural. If such a thing exists, now that is a different story.
|
But if it doesn't exist then the word for it cannot be correctly used because everything that it is describing is either inaccurate or bullshit.
|
OH I just remembered an actual creepy story...
In 6th grade, my teacher was reading us the Telltale Heart. As things got more intense and the heartbeats permeated more of the narrator's conscious , the clock on the wall started to spin rapidly. It complimented the dark room and the grey skies outside in a way that I can't really explain too well.
I have a sneaking suspicion that my teacher rigged it to freak us all out cuz that's something he would do. But nonetheless, it freaked that group of 11-12 year olds out.
|
United States47024 Posts
On September 02 2015 01:35 Ketara wrote:
What I am saying is that everybody is agreeing on the definition of Supernatural, IE something which is behaving outside the natural laws of the universe.
What we are disagreeing on is the definition of natural laws of the universe as either being something of absolute truth, or something of currently perceived truth.
If you believe that "natural laws of the universe" refers to something of absolute truth, then by necessity the word supernatural cannot be correctly used in any context ever, because everything that happens ever is abiding by the natural laws of the universe.
Again, you're distorting the position here, because the intrinsic idea that supernatural things don't exist isn't simply that things all follow the laws of the universe, but specifically that they follow laws of the universe that can be deduced through empirical observation and logical reasoning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
