If Science Can't Answer it...

[KWED]

Neither, but rather extrasensory perception.

How do you know such a thing even exists? How do you now you aren't just imagining it?
Remember that there is a million dollar prize for anyone who can demonstrate having ESP. You could be a very rich little koala.

By thorough consideration of all the relevant information.

And what does this "relevant information" consist of?

I call it best reasoning, all things considered.

By "all things", you mean "stuff that I believe supports my position"?

 

[KWED]

No. One considers the quality of the claim too all things considered.

So why is seeing a spectral image of a dead person "better quality" than the claim of seeing matter temporarily change form?

 

[KWED]

Sorry to disturb your point, but I consider all the above in my 'all things considered' evaluation.

So if you consider the testimony of people who have never seen ghosts, don't believe in ghosts, have tried to contact ghosts and failed, and who have conducted experiments that have failed to show any sign of ghosts, along with all the evidence for hallucinations, delusions, consciousness being a product of the physical brain, etc as dispassionately as claims to have seen ghosts - how do you arrive at "ghosts are real" as the most reasonable explanation?

 

[KWED]

The word 'Scientism' should not be looked at as necessarily good or bad. One can be proud of following Scientism. It is just a philosophy I do not personally follow and argue against.

If you follow it, defend it!

"Scientism" as usually defined by apologists for the supernatural doesn't really exist at all. It isn't an actual "philosophy". I can't imagine any rational thinker who would follow it.

Now, if you want to argue that there is a better method of developing reasonable explanations for observable phenomena than science and the scientific method, then feel free.

 

[KWED]

I did not claim that there's a rational argument. Rational arguments are in the realm of the material, including science.

Well, that's a refreshingly honest admission!

 

[paradox]

But, he claimed, such gaps in scientific explanation should provide no comfort to theologians who wished to claim a distinctive sphere of competence for religion

Therefore Dawkins admits scientists would do anything to undermine religion, such as developing theories that are strictly contradictory to religion.

 

[KWED]

I said 'purported' because I can't verify their honesty and accuracy.

Whoah!
So you are saying that you base your conclusion on information that you admit may be inaccurate or dishonest?
And you are complaining about "scientism"?

That's part of my consideration. Anecdotes are not perfect evidence but that does not make them worthless evidence either. One person enountering a ghost can always be mistaken or correct. And further on I consider what are the chances all people claiming ghost encounters are mistaken.While I claim the preponderance of evidence can allow us to form certain positions,

There are many verified examples of multiple, corroborating accounts of events that did not happen. Anecdotes that require suspension of disbelief are worthless as evidence.

We use our best judgment of what is going on in our daily lives and the world around us as part of normal human reasoning. It's a judgment on 'all things considered'. It is not a perfect science, but it is the best we got on things science can't tell us definitively.

But your "best judgement" requires rejecting all possible explanations in favour of the supernatural.

 

[KWED]

You want evidence for the cyclical nature of temporal phenomena? Time as you experience it is literally defined by the cyclical motion of astronomical bodies.

"Time" is a human concept. It is linear in nature, not cyclical. The universe is not defined by time because time only exists when there are humans to define it.

Do you know what time it is right now? You should be able to estimate it by observing the sun’s position in the sky, which is almost where it was 24 hours ago.

I have been in an underground facility for several weeks. We run our own time system down here based deteriorating performance. Our shifts get shorter and our breaks longer during the length of our posting.

And I'm still none the wiser about your reference to opposites attracting.

 

[KWED]

But spiritual/paranormal things cannot be proved or disproved by science at this time.

Some can be disproved, depending on what the claim is. Many claims of the supernatural have been disproved.

Hence the best method is reason over all available information. And from there I take away what the preponderance of evidence is showing my reason. The more thorough I research and reason, the more neutral and fair-minded I can be, the more valuable is my takeaway.

One of my takeaways is that things happen that break the current materialist paradigm. Question #2 becomes what is this 'more' which leads me next to consideration of wisdom traditions (Vedic (Hindu), Theosophical, etcetera) that present understandings for my consideration (not blind acceptance).

Once again you are admitting that you consider potentially inaccurate and dishonest claims to be of more value than hard evidence as long as they appear to support your existing position.
And you call this "reason"!

 

[rational experiences]

A human practice.

States any human belief is first.

Where's sciences evidence first?

You know as a human part of our consciousness is to BS to support the belief and practice. The I want group.

Once family said that type of behaviour was cult. As forced human group indoctrination is involved. Which just happens to include science.

As it's not natural behaviour.

Human life in cosmic law. Which is natural.

For example I know I got brain hurt in earths atmosphere change. As humans in science said how can one human mind coerce another?

Studied it as a science as they wanted to. A belief. A choice.

Equals a meaning in science is one human and another human. Biology.

Isn't satellite haarp computer coded program issued out by machines to force it on the brain.

As it wasn't a machine by machine identification causing it to the human brain first. A humans owned life memory recorded as they lived was stronger by life's losses than their victim.

Placing them in consciousness as owner of an egotism problem.

Atmospheric causes already owned the cause. Human life and mind is bodily DNA inherited also.

The designer of earths machines and bio mind control is of every action. A human man. A father. A choice. His control human. His control of a machine.

A father has human sex not machine sex to own any human baby to adult life today. Or have you forgotten how to be a human?

Today however his brother shared consciousness that affects his mind...
as all men were one as human father's beginning only. Has sex with robots.

Imagine what a natural man's consciousness would be told.

What you ignore. We taught one man. One woman. Family experience an over consciousness.

You killed off your owned Dna healthy biology. Designer man. Yet it resurrected as a memory recorded taking healthy waters microbes to inform that image.

So the designer human is dead. But manifests as baby man born by human woman in the atmosphere.

Scientist caused AI effect. If you hadn't you wouldn't be congratulating your latest human atmospheric experiments.

Controlled every moment by your human choice. A living human choice. Biology choice only. It wasn't doing it itself.

Meanwhile. Stephen Hawking may as well have not existed. Designer man disappearing to achieve his test studies. It was worth it you claim.

As a human has to live for another human to observe your behaviour and why thinking outcomes are varied as a human to mine. To want to study. The want in your mind ignored as relevant.

If I wasn't living as my owned self my message as a humans biological experience wouldn't even exist. Is why we say and ask...
so what does it have to do with science?

I know if your type of human thinking didn't exist I'd be safe and healthy.

Then your own behaviours are involved. Highly questionable and not ethical. As civilisation status not about natural life laws are involved.

The reason...you would not do it to your self. Proving lying is involved even before you experiment.

As all humans are human. But all humans aren't treated equally. It's just because science was chosen by the historic rich man. Position not correct first.

Is the argument just humans use.

It's why just humans get destroyed.

The motivation to qualify human behaviour is the need to place questions into categories of human challenge.

 

[KWED]

Give me the best experimental evidence you know of if you can.
Overwhelming anecdotal evidence says alien abductions are real, miracles in every religion and cult. Faith healers, who have later been arrested as fraud are considered real by that method and Christian Science members can heal disease with only prayer according to overwhelming anecdotal evidence. Except the American Cancer Society released a report demonstrating over 200 children with cancers that were highly treatable with medicine, had died as a result of Christian Science members relying only on prayer. Also that their overall mortality rate was higher than the average population.
But they still insist and prove it with anecdotal evidence. Thousands of them.

I remember a similar thing when a friend of a friend on facebook was arguing that cannabis oil "kills cancer" and cited a case with "scientific evidence" supporting it, where a woman was cured of a terminal cancer by oils and gave me a dozen references on alt-health websites. After less than 10 minutes of Googling I found that the woman had also undergone surgery and chemotherapy. Even after showing this, they still claimed that it was the oils that worked and conventional medicine is unnecessary and only for profit.

 

[KWED]

Who is anti-science?

Anyone who rejects or ignores scientific evidence where it contradicts their supernatural beliefs.

I don't place all my faith in science, and don't consider it the saviour of mankind,

Who does? I am a scientist and I don't do that.

 

[KWED]

Does God exist is my #1 example.Another is the existence of the soul.

This depends on the definition of terms.

 

[KWED]

You see no value in poetry? Then you and I are poles apart there.

What objective value does poetry have, and how is it measured?
Does all poetry have the same value, or does it vary depending on author, style, etc?
If someone doesn't like a particular poem, are they wrong?
Are the lives of people who never read poetry less is some way that the lives of those who do?
Is there an optimal amount of poetry? It quantity or quality better?
Is it impossible for science to study some of these questions?

You won't tune a piano with a socket set,

Unfortunately for your analogy, that's exactly what you use to tune a piano!

and you won't plumb the depths of the human spirit with ultrasound.

Once again, ouch! Ultrasound is actually used to produce detailed measurements of activity deep in the brain, and what is "the human spirit" if not brain activity?

This made my day. Thanks!

 

[KWED]

Well, our differences comes down to who is the one between us most willing to be unbiased and that's where we're stuck.

Well, you have certainly demonstrated your willingness to accept flawed and questionable sources simply because they support your existing position.

 

[KWED]

I can bring up evidence into infinity, but it won't take you long to find/cut/paste some skeptic's words. I know the drill after decades now of discussions.

IOW, I can provide loads of evidence, but you'll just point out its flaws.

Pretty much all the evidence in that website I consider strong and don't have any one thing in particular to present. It is the cumulative weight of everything that has me a believer beyond reasonable doubt.

So if enough people answer "what is 2+2?" with "Five", yo will accept that the answer really is five? "Cumulative weight" only applies if all the components have weight to begin with.

Another problem with your argument - if you didn't believe the first claim, or the second, or the third, or the ninth, why the tenth or fifteenth?
If you rearranged the order in which they were presented, would it change how long it took for you to be convinced?

I think many so-called skeptics have a dislike of paranormal/spiritual things people claim that are beyond current science, but they do their best to appear logical and fair as they muster their best sounding attack possible and then all rally around it. Strong science types really don't like paranormal/spiritual types to be way ahead of them on these subjects. Science is to rule the roost!!

Sceptics dislike extraordinary claims based on little to no evidence. Do you blame us?

 

[KWED]

Well the theory I espoused is that there are entities in other dimensions and at vibratory rates not directly detectable by our three-dimensional physical senses and instruments.

So, in the 'object moving' case you mentioned above we can see the physical activity with our physical senses, but we are unable to see the source behind the movement. Hence in this view the 'object moving' is the relatively rare time that an unseen source is able to manipulate material energy (perhaps draining batteries or leaving cold spots) to produce an observable effect.

Why do you think these pan-dimensional entities can think of nothing better to do for us than make a vase fall over in an old house, or reincarnate someone with somewhat vague and ambiguous memories of their past life, or something?

So, in the 'object moving' case you mentioned above we can see the physical activity with our physical senses, but we are unable to see the source behind the movement.

Like a windmill?

 

[RestlessSoul]

What objective value does poetry have, and how is it measured?
Does all poetry have the same value, or does it vary depending on author, style, etc?
If someone doesn't like a particular poem, are they wrong?
Are the lives of people who never read poetry less is some way that the lives of those who do?
Is there an optimal amount of poetry? It quantity or quality better?
Is it impossible for science to study some of these questions?

Unfortunately for your analogy, that's exactly what you use to tune a piano!

Once again, ouch! Ultrasound is actually used to produce detailed measurements of activity deep in the brain, and what is "the human spirit" if not brain activity?

This made my day. Thanks!

I would say the lives of people who are deaf to poetry are the poorer for it, yes. Though that is just my subjective opinion. It is also my subjective opinion, that people who have no sense of the spiritual in their lives are similarly the poorer for it.

And no, I would not associate the human spirit with the brain, the heart or indeed the spleen; although as mind, body and spirit are facets of one fundamental whole, they are naturally connected, as all things are.

I had no idea you tuned a piano with a socket set, I guess that particular poetic flourish fell flat then. Glad I amused you, you must need all the laughs you can get if you really are locked away in an underground facility somewhere. No wonder your online persona is so full of sound and fury.

 

[RestlessSoul]

"Time" is a human concept. It is linear in nature, not cyclical. The universe is not defined by time because time only exists when there are humans to define it.

I have been in an underground facility for several weeks. We run our own time system down here based deteriorating performance. Our shifts get shorter and our breaks longer during the length of our posting.

And I'm still none the wiser about your reference to opposites attracting.

While I would agree that our experience of time is subjective, it does not follow that time has no objective existence; even if you are a phenomenalist who believes that all properties of the material world are reducible to sense data, it’s still only our perception of the material world that is in question there, not it’s very existence.

Time and space are defining characteristics of our universe, and all objects within it, certainly at the macro level, require a time co-ordinate in order to locate them. Indeed there is a case, argued very eloquently by Carlo Rovelli in The Order of Time, that we should think of the universe as being populated not by objects, but by events; and events unfold in time, do they not?

So no, I don’t agree that time is a human concept - any animal that has felt his own heartbeat has had an encounter with time, after all. It may be, however, that our probably illusory experience of time is linear, as well as cyclical. Everything in the cosmos is orbiting something, and what are orbits if not cyclical?

 

[George-ananda]

Not yet directectly detectable by currently known means and currently detectable via it's immediate effects. It is in no way similar you your proposed "non-physical entities" which are somehow fundamentally immune to scientific method.

No fundamental scientific definitions need to be "extended" or changed to incorporate Dark Matter. It is part of the "material world" because we can detect it acting in the "material world". The open questions are what it is and how it works (quite major questions admittedly) but if/when we get better understanding of those questions, that will be simply extending our understanding of the "material world".

Perhaps I need to clarify that by the extended definitions of physical and material that I am claiming that living non-physical entities are indeed also physical and material. So when you say 'your proposed "non-physical entities" you are not stating or understanding me correctly.

If that's the only basis you have, maybe you should stop unconditionally excluding even the possibility of a materialist explanation for literally no good reason.

Again, I am proposing a materialist explanation but one that involves material not directly detectable by science at this time.

Ideas are good and to be welcomed. If you're incapable of taking them beyond ideas though, they're not of any practical use and should be set aside (at least until/unless anything concrete can be established to support them).

Not being a follower of Scientism, I am very interested in ideas from other wisdom traditions. It's of very practical use in forming my understanding of reality and my place in it.