Atheists - A Question...

[nPeace]

Nope.

So, exactly what do you mean by the term 'supernatural'? What is a scenario where a supernatural explanation actually explains something.

For example, take your scenario. Exactly how does a supernatural explain what happened?

So how can you say you know there is no supernatural explanation?
You've got me confused.

 

[Lekatt]

Clinical death only means the body has shut down. This differs from brain death. the brain is still alive and functioning through clinical death and can be revived. The NDEs are expained as brain trauma of oxygen debt. Brains often hallucinate when in glucose and oxygen debt. Athletes have subtle forms of this.


There is no conclusive evidence. The brains still work and can even sense a chair being knocked over. Nothing explains the claim that a person has sensory ability outside of their bodies. The most likely explanation is that the patients hear things and piece together details they didn't see.

I got that the brain shuts down 11 seconds from the time the heart stops from a science journal. Sounded good to me.

It's OK if you want to believe what you want to believe.

 

[nPeace]

Which requires correct premises. Now, how do you know those premises are correct?

Yes. in the same way you do.

Which basic premises do you propose?

The Bible is true.
Design requires a designer.

I want to point out that science is based on both deductive and inductive inferences, so this is NOT a different way of doing things than science.

Correct.

 

[Polymath257]

Yes. in the same way you do.

By observation and testing? Good, that is doing science.

The Bible is true.
Design requires a designer.

Justify those assumptions. Also, tell me how you know that something is designed as opposed to naturally occurring.

Correct.

So the problem is NOT science, but that reasoning from the evidence does not support your beliefs?

 

[Polymath257]

I got that the brain shuts down 11 seconds from the time the heart stops from a science journal. Sounded good to me.

It's OK if you want to believe what you want to believe.

I would doubt that claim. The brain typically has enough energy reserves (in ATP) to survive about 4 minutes. Can you give a reference for that science journal?

 

[Polymath257]

So how can you say you know there is no supernatural explanation?
You've got me confused.

Ultimately, because the whole concept of a supernatural is self-contradictory.

A good place to start is to figure out what it means to be natural. Then we can discuss whether it is even possible to be supernatural. And whether a supernatural can hope to give an explanation.

 

[fantome profane]

Well, yeah. I mean, I've actually been in this scenario, minus the guy staring at everyone. Or maybe there was a guy and I just didn't notice him there.

I had what was definitely a UTI. I was in agony all night long with it. I went to the emergency clinic first thing in the morning. I sat in the waiting room for 45 minutes in pure agony. By the time it came for me to see the doctor, the pain had subsided. Just like that. But I went for testing anyway, and turns out, I still had the UTI and it had begun moving into one of my kidneys. If I had gone home thinking I was cured, I would have been in a world of trouble.

People come and go in waiting rooms all the time around here. Some get up to stretch their legs, or go for a smoke, or wait in their cars, or whatever. I wouldn't find that very strange either, I don't think.

This raises another serious point. There are many instances of people with serious medical conditions going to faith healers, being told they were healed, and then forgoing much needed medical treatment leading to serious complications and even death.

The faith healer provides a placebo along with adrenaline and of course the person feels better, but they still need medical treatment.

 

[JDMS]

Cool.
Why would you attribute the miracle to some supernatural being rather than a Type 3 advance civilization some billion light years away on Planet X, who are using their tech?

Who said aliens can't be gods?

 

[SkepticThinker]

This raises another serious point. There are many instances of people with serious medical conditions going to faith healers, being told they were healed, and then forgoing much needed medical treatment leading to serious complications and even death.

The faith healer provides a placebo along with adrenaline and of course the person feels better, but they still need medical treatment.

Excellent point.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Excellent point.

Well, there is at least one weird test of false beliefs, that had a physical effect.

 

[F1fan]

You know nothing about me.
In fact, I am sure you would say the same thing to a former atheist who once held on to what you don't want to let go of, and who now believes in what you deny... and they would laugh at you... like I am doing.
What a lame assertion.

What I know about you is that you ignore my questions about why your God created cancers that affect children. If you believe your God exists, and that it is the creator of all things, then it is also responsible for creating cancers and genetic defects, and anything else that exist in this world that is deadly to human beings.

you were asking atheist why they don’t believe in a God, and if they would believe if there was a certain scenario that suggests it, maybe there is a supernatural at work in our world. We don’t believe because the concepts that Christians believe, or any other theorist, isn’t consistent with what we observe in the universe. the universe operates and functions as if no gods exist. It is a curiosity why any Christian, or Muslim would believe that God exists, and his loving, and cares about human beings, but then just stance by and lets children suffer, mothers of children suffer, creates horrible bacterias that kill people, yet you still worship this God. Explain.

 

[F1fan]

I got that the brain shuts down 11 seconds from the time the heart stops from a science journal. Sounded good to me.

It's OK if you want to believe what you want to believe.

Im not believing in supernatural nonsense. I defer to experts in science to examine and explain phenomena that we observe. It is very typical for humans to hold cultural beliefs and biases that affect their interpretation of experiences. So scientists won’t take the word for those who claim to have experienced something when there is a more credible and natural explanation.

You should examine your own motivations to believe that nde are what some claim to experience.

 

[Nakosis]

Yes. You are also willing to believe whatever process scientists can creatively imagine.

No, I'm pretty sure Einstein was wrong about relativity.
Actually disproving relativity is a different matter.

A number of scientists continue to try and disprove relativity.
Being a scientist doesn't stop someone from being mistaken or even lying about a claim.

Folks are constantly trying to disprove scientific claims.
The reliability comes numerous folks trying to disprove a scientific claim and so far being unable to.

 

[Lekatt]

Im not believing in supernatural nonsense. I defer to experts in science to examine and explain phenomena that we observe. It is very typical for humans to hold cultural beliefs and biases that affect their interpretation of experiences. So scientists won’t take the word for those who claim to have experienced something when there is a more credible and natural explanation.

You should examine your own motivations to believe that nde are what some claim to experience.

I wouldn't ask you to believe in anything. Whatever is, is. I am comfortable in what I know to be true.

Nice talking to you.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

No, I'm pretty sure Einstein was wrong about relativity.
Actually disproving relativity is a different matter.

A number of scientists continue to try and disprove relativity.
Being a scientist doesn't stop someone from being mistaken or even lying about a claim.

Folks are constantly trying to disprove scientific claims.
The reliability comes numerous folks trying to disprove a scientific claim and so far being unable to.

Here is a fun one. From in effect one of the earliest scientist we know of.
"Man is the measure of all things: of the things that are, that they are, of the things that are not, that they are not." Protagoras.

It has never been refuted for what the objective reality really is.
The modern version is here.
Cognitive Relativism | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

In short it is cognitive, moral and cultural relativism for what the world is a such and not just in practice the objective parts. It even connects to this:
Philosophy of science - Wikipedia

 

[Nakosis]

Here is a fun one. From in effect one of the earliest scientist we know of.
"Man is the measure of all things: of the things that are, that they are, of the things that are not, that they are not." Protagoras.

It has never been refuted for what the objective reality really is.
The modern version is here.
Cognitive Relativism | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

In short it is cognitive, moral and cultural relativism for what the world is a such and not just in practice the objective parts. It even connects to this:
Philosophy of science - Wikipedia

Yes, philosophy is always muddling things up.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Yes, philosophy is always muddling things up.

Yeah, it is a mess. But I have learned to cope with it.

 

[Polymath257]

Who created SARS? Where did it come from?

I doubt that any person created SARS. It came from a mutation of a different corona virus. Pretty standard stuff.

 

[Nimos]

Either way, investigating the substance of both scientific and religious "belief" is important.

Agree

It would be similar to scientists who are clueless about 98% of the universe, and will only believe things they can test with their puny instrument, and limited knowledge... never mind they are wrong 75% of the time.

They might be, but science is not only about being right, it is equally important to be wrong, that is the beauty of it

Science in many cases tells us nothing about why something is the way it is, especially when it comes to general questions. But where science is exceptionally good is exactly when it is "wrong". Because in that case, it tells us that something is definitely not true and then you have to come up with another explanation.

Now, consider that they really did know something, when something associated with previous knowledge happens they don't have to wonder, or guess.
They can form a hypothesis around the previous knowledge, and test it to see if it is correct.

Again, science is not about finding the answer to the "why" question, it is about explaining how something works. And that is exactly why they can use former knowledge to discover new things because they know how something works and based on that knowledge it might be useful for something else or it might not, again, being wrong in science is not bad like "Ohh... jeez that person is stupid". In most cases, hypotheses are based on some sort of guess or assumption with some prior knowledge as the basis for the hypothesis.

Did you get the point?
Knowing of and about God, one does not need to think as those do, who are clueless.
Their knowledge helps them come to the right conclusion... especially if the conclusion is one that's already available, and don't require pursuing.

No, that is not how science works.

Scientists can rely on established knowledge, not simply based on them "knowing" it. but because it has been proven to be true. Claiming to know of God is a completely different thing because it is not established knowledge as it hasn't been proven to be true. So you using this "knowledge" to draw a conclusion about God is objectively wrong. Whereas science is based on what is currently our best explanation. Can they be wrong? Sure absolutely, but I almost guarantee that there is probably not a single scientist out there that wouldn't love to prove Einstein wrong. Because it would make them world famous and it would also improve our understanding of the Universe.

 

[HonestJoe]

Atheists... If this happened to you, would this convince you that the spiritual side of life is a reality - that miracles and the supernatural are real?
Or would you attribute it to a 'natural' phenomenon - perhaps associated with some scientific experiment or mind altering technology?

I wouldn't attribute it to anything at that point since I wouldn't have anything like enough information to reach a conclusion. I certainly don't see any reason to assume anything "spiritual" specifically.

It's also worth noting that "miracle" describes something that literally can't happen, so if something we thought to be miraculous actually did happen, it would prove it wasn't actually miraculous. Similarly, if something perceived as "supernatural" turned out to be real, it would actually be "natural" (something that has happened with all sorts of things in the past).

The entire "natural" vs "supernatural" argument is really just empty semantics. The only relevant questions are; What was the cause of a phenomena or event? And; Whether we currently understand what that cause is or not?