Per Wikipedia: Science is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Physics Meets Paranormal
- Thread starter KKawohl
- Start date
CogentPhilosopher
Philosophy Student
Alright then.
Please tell me, can you use Thelema to make a testable prediction?
I don't know much about Thelema. I was talking about Theosophy if you are aware of what that is.
CogentPhilosopher
Philosophy Student
Yeah, trying to use spiritual ecstasy to gain knowledge of deity.
Now same question then, can you use this in order to make a testable prediction?
This is not cogent. What is 'trying to use spiritual ecstasy to gain knowledge of deity'? I know that is not Theosophy.
Theosophy is not a physical science. It is a spiritual science. So, it is not intended to make physically testable predictions.
CogentPhilosopher
Philosophy Student
So I googled Theosophy to see if I was wrong and the definition that first comes up on google is pretty close to what I said. Seeing as you used Wikipedia as a source for a definition I did not think that you cared much about what source is used.
Okay then, what are you predicting then?
Give me an example.
Callisto
Hellenismos, BTW
Theosophy falls under the heading of pantheism.
CogentPhilosopher
Philosophy Student
By definition it could really fall under any theistic belief, though it definitely would meld very well with pantheism.
I do not see how bringing that up has any relevance to what I was saying however.
Callisto
Hellenismos, BTW
I was responding to your statement that it isn't a science by identifying what it does qualify as being.
So, you didn't know what it was after all.
It tells us about the structure of things beyond the physical realm. It predicts how things operate and will operate on the super-physical planes.
So I am not seeing a point to your questioning. We agree it is not a physical science, so what?
Last edited:
CogentPhilosopher
Philosophy Student
Reread what I typed....slowly this time.
How do you confirm those predictions?
Don't try to play the semantics game with me, you already defined science a particular way adding material or spiritual in front of it should not change the definition.
Those predictions can only be confirmed by those who experience the super-physical realms. So, this is not PHYSICAL science, again I know that.
Here's a definition of the use of the word science by Webster's dictionary:
2a : a department of systematized knowledge as an object of study the science of theology
Again, I ask what is the point you are getting at??
Last edited:
CogentPhilosopher
Philosophy Student
Can you prove that these are indeed from super-physical realms and not something else?
I can't. Only those with strong psychic abilities can tell us about these things. No, this can not be proved to physical science if that is what your point is.
CogentPhilosopher
Philosophy Student
I want you to stop being academically dishonest. A science has to have testable results, if those results cannot be tested or verified then it is not a science.
What are the purported abilities of these strong psychics and how do you know that they exist?
So now you are disagreeing with Webster's dictionary?
What's the bid deal about a word anyway?
CogentPhilosopher
Philosophy Student
I was paraphrasing and you quoted Wikipedia not Webster's dictionary.
Definition of SCIENCE
Address the whole post please instead of evading the question.
crowfeather
One
Words are strange and powerful things. Each one is different to any other.
The word 'science', when I repeated it to myself, over and over, as a child, suddenly lost any meaning it may have had, and scared me quite badly.
It seemed evil and malevolent, just out and out wrong.
Curiously, this has not changed over a half-century. It still repels me.
The word 'science', when I repeated it to myself, over and over, as a child, suddenly lost any meaning it may have had, and scared me quite badly.
It seemed evil and malevolent, just out and out wrong.
Curiously, this has not changed over a half-century. It still repels me.
CogentPhilosopher
Philosophy Student
I am sorry to say that I do not understand this.
I was raised to believe that the science that made things we like was real science and the science that contradicted the beliefs I was raised in was the work of Satan and not real science.
When I left Christianity and believed in the paranormal I would try to reconcile my beliefs with science into a sort of psuedoscience and this still held true for a while after I gave up religion all together and became a pantheist.
I did not fully get over the fact that science is not something you can pick and choose from until I became a skeptic proper.
I really do not see how one cannot overcome their environment in that way...On second thought I am still very young so maybe my mind is more open to new information?