Proof of the supernatural

[Alceste]

Well when referring to the OP, how are we to know that he is a competent source? I know nothing about him other than what I've read here. There is no way to determine his level of credibility.

We can start by acknowledging that memory is imperfect even in the MOST competent people, and work from there.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

We can start by acknowledging that memory is imperfect even in the MOST competent people, and work from there.

Same with motives.

I'm assuming for argument's sake that the OP is being honest, but in a real-world situation, I wouldn't automatically assume that he wasn't embellishing the story... or that he didn't make it up from whole cloth.

 

[George-ananda]

The OP is, for one. The OP dismissed all natural causes as so unlikely that they could be disregarded. Any time we conclude a supernatural explanation without considering the relative probability of the possible explanations - which MUST include consideration of the likelihood of the supernatural explanation - we're excluding all natural causes.

You know that line from Sherlock Holmes that goes "when you eliminate the impossible, then whatever remains, however unlikely, must be the truth"? It only works when the things being eliminated are actually impossible, not merely unlikely. When we conclude that some explanation must be true because it's the only one left, then we're implicitly saying that all the other explanations are impossible... not merely improbable, but impossible.

For this discussion I am speaking for George-ananda now and not the OP. I think the OP has some good thoughts and agrees with what I'm saying but his expression could be improved upon. We all consider natural explanations.

IOW, bad evidence becomes good evidence if you have enough of it.

'bad' is a subjective word. And my opinion is different then yours. I see patterns to the evidence and competent experiencers.

Edit: regardless, what do "millions of events in the history of mankind" have to say about this story? Even if supernatural forces exist, we still have natural explanations. People do win lotteries by chance. Lotteries have been rigged. People do sometimes lie.

As I already said in an earlier post we will never know for sure what the reality is regarding this one story. Natural and supernatural explanations are possible. My beliefs are not based on one story.

 

[Alceste]

Same with motives.

I'm assuming for argument's sake that the OP is being honest, but in a real-world situation, I wouldn't automatically assume that he wasn't embellishing the story... or that he didn't make it up from whole cloth.

Most stories pick up extra details with retelling, even if we are trying to be accurate. When the brain finds a blank spot, it just throws something in there. I haven't assumed this is made up, since I've got similar - even more unbelievable - stories of my own. But it is safe to assume some of the details are not correct. The explanation that she wanted to see him because he's "good at math", for example, is just the sort of thing a brain struggling to tie random occurrences together into a coherent narrative would add. However, this is pretty run of the mill as far as experiences of this nature are concerned.

My husband and I have a saying: "weird **** happens". What we don't have is an easy, thoughtless explanation - we both prefer to hold off making conclusions until we can be reasonably confident they are correct.

 

[George-ananda]

Not necessarily. Human memory is notoriously inaccurate, however competent we are.

Perhaps you misunderstand me. Everybody acknowledges competent people can be wrong. That's why their testimony is 'evidence' and not 'proof'.

If you see me shoot someone then the court will take your testimony as evidence and not proof. Same thing here.

 

[Iti oj]

How often it's what we see or experience differ from what actualy happened. Stage magic for example.

 

[Alceste]

Perhaps you misunderstand me. Everybody acknowledges competent people can be wrong. That's why their testimony is 'evidence' and not 'proof'.

If you see me shoot someone then the court will take your testimony as evidence and not proof. Same thing here.

So what we have is evidence that sane people can have experiences they can not explain. We have no evidence that these experiences have any basis in actual events, though, since our minds are completely unreliable, however sane we are.

 

[George-ananda]

So what we have is evidence that sane people can have experiences they can not explain. We have no evidence that these experiences have any basis in actual events, though, since our minds are completely unreliable, however sane we are.

'completely unreliable' is to me more than a bit of an overstatement.

We each make our own judgement on the quantity and quality of the evidence while considering all things and all argumentation from both sides.

And jurors who are presented with the exact same evidence and argumentation can often disagree. So we can disagree. Probably if I was on a jury with Alceste and Penguin the judge would have to move us to an extended stay hotel.

 

[Alceste]

'completely unreliable' is to me more than a bit of an overstatement.

We each make our own judgement on the quantity and quality of the evidence while considering all things and all argumentation from both sides.

And jurors who are presented with the exact same evidence and argumentation can often disagree. So we can disagree. Probably if I was on a jury with Alceste and Penguin the judge would have to move us to an extended stay hotel.

I've spent too much time reading about cognitive bias to have any faith left in the human mind to accurately record and relate accurate information.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

For this discussion I am speaking for George-ananda now and not the OP. I think the OP has some good thoughts and agrees with what I'm saying but his expression could be improved upon. We all consider natural explanations.

Some more than others. In jumping to the conclusion that God did it, the OP rejected natural explanations prematurely.

'bad' is a subjective word. And my opinion is different then yours. I see patterns to the evidence and competent experiencers.

"Bad" isn't that subjective when we're talking about things like statistical tests. Also, we can consider whether a person's standard is consistent. Personally, my standard for "supernatural" explanations is no lower or higher than my standard for "natural" explanations. If a plane goes down in the Caribbean, I would expect the person arguing that the crash was caused by the effects of the Bermuda Triangle to make just as rigorous a case as the person arguing that it was caused by a clogged engine fuel filter.

As I already said in an earlier post we will never know for sure what the reality is regarding this one story. Natural and supernatural explanations are possible. My beliefs are not based on one story.

But we're talking about this particular story. The question isn't "does the supernatural exist?" It's "did this incident have a supernatural cause?" The OP's argument has shifted around a bit, but it seems to float between "it must have been God" and "it was most likely God." Do you think there's a good case for either of those conclusions? Please note that neither of them are "we can't be sure it wasn't God."

 

[IHaveTheGift]

I've spent too much time reading about cognitive bias to have any faith left in the human mind to accurately record and relate accurate information.

Then how can you even be sure that you might have completely overlooked an obvious miracle of God in your life?

You are kind of making a hypocrite of yourself
You are completely dumbing down the human mind and using your human mind to do it from things you read that you say the human mind cant accurately record you doing.

Man I really wish to reply to some of you here, but I have two active threads going and weighing in the replies, I have to choose ones that I like more, obvious.
Not so much as like, but ones most I deem relevant such as this one.

Someone else said something about rejected natural explanations prematurely.
How did I do that?
I weighed in everything as I was talking to the woman and my brain clicked and clicked clicked all the options.
I didnt even take her last dollar to play for myself.
So obviously I didnt believe it would come out.
later when it turned out she won, I then deemed my opinion to it.
tons of people were all talking about it.
Tons of explanations were discussed.
Everyone deemed the same thing.
Everyone in the apt complex.
I didnt discuss it here though.
Ad popuar is why, i knew that would come up.

My atheist cousins though, when I told them, said that was am amazing story, but they remain atheist to this day.

I am saying it now though, because nothing was deemed premature.
Its not like she told me about the dream and bing, God.
Nope.
She didn't win yet, that came hours later.
Everyone who found out went nuts over it.
I think about 5-10 people knew about the dream.

later that day, hundreds learned of it and it snowballed.

Thank you to all that are keeping this thread going and your interesting posts.
I cant possibly keep up with them all.
PM me if you have something that you really really really want an answer that I haven't said yet to an unknwon question.

Hopes my PM box doesn't explode :thud:

 

[Alceste]

Then how can you even be sure that you might have completely overlooked an obvious miracle of God in your life?

You are kind of making a hypocrite of yourself
You are completely dumbing down the human mind and using your human mind to do it from things you read that you say the human mind cant accurately record you doing.

Man I really wish to reply to some of you here, but I have two active threads going and weighing in the replies, I have to choose ones that I like more, obvious.
Not so much as like, but ones most I deem relevant such as this one.

Someone else said something about rejected natural explanations prematurely.
How did I do that?
I weighed in everything as I was talking to the woman and my brain clicked and clicked clicked all the options.
I didnt even take her last dollar to play for myself.
So obviously I didnt believe it would come out.
later when it turned out she won, I then deemed my opinion to it.
tons of people were all talking about it.
Tons of explanations were discussed.
Everyone deemed the same thing.
Everyone in the apt complex.
I didnt discuss it here though.
Ad popuar is why, i knew that would come up.

My atheist cousins though, when I told them, said that was am amazing story, but they remain atheist to this day.

I am saying it now though, because nothing was deemed premature.
Its not like she told me about the dream and bing, God.
Nope.
She didn't win yet, that came hours later.
Everyone who found out went nuts over it.
I think about 5-10 people knew about the dream.

later that day, hundreds learned of it and it snowballed.

Thank you to all that are keeping this thread going and your interesting posts.
I cant possibly keep up with them all.
PM me if you have something that you really really really want an answer that I haven't said yet to an unknwon question.

Hopes my PM box doesn't explode :thud:

I've only asked you to explain your reasoning. You're wasting a lot of breath going on a tirade against me instead of answering a very simple question.

1: You knew an old woman who dreamed of three numbers, played the lotto with them and won.
2: ????????????????
3: Therefore your religion is true.

What goes in number 2? You say you've considered many possibilities, but you haven't told us any of them, or why you elected to dismiss them in favour of affirming your preexisting theistic inclinations.

Moreover, you're overtly defensive and hostile toward anyone who presents a more plausible explanation - that your memory is flawed, or that it was a nifty coincidence, or that we can experience glimpses of the future without divine intervention because spacetime is non-linear in some way.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

1: You knew an old woman who dreamed of three numbers, played the lotto with them and won.
2: ????????????????
3: Therefore your religion is true.

To be fair, this pretty much sums up a lot of the types of "logical" arguments people use as "evidence" of their religion. I suspect many people just aren't that well versed in the fundamentals of basic logic, and really are quite nonplussed by even the most straightforward explanations of why their methodology is flawed.

 

[Alceste]

To be fair, this pretty much sums up a lot of the types of "logical" arguments people use as "evidence" of their religion. I suspect many people just aren't that well versed in the fundamentals of basic logic, and really are quite nonplussed by even the most straightforward explanations of why their methodology is flawed.

I suppose you're right. In this case, we also see how endless embellishments that are not pertinent to what is actually odd about this story can be added to enhance the sense of oddness and obscure the fact that, however odd it is to dream winning lotto numbers, it was bound to happen to someone, somewhere, at some point.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I suppose you're right. In this case, we also see how endless embellishments that are not pertinent to what is actually odd about this story can be added to enhance the sense of oddness and obscure the fact that, however odd it is to dream winning lotto numbers, it was bound to happen to someone, somewhere, at some point.

Just found this tidbit regarding Powerball:

"The Powerball drawing on March 30, 2005 produced 110 second-prize winners. The total payout to these winners was $19,400,000, with 89 winners each receiving $100,000. The other 21 winners received $500,000, as they were Power Play selections.

MUSL officials initially suspected fraud or a reporting error. However, all 110 winners had played numbers from fortune cookies made by Wonton Food Inc. of Long Island City, New York."

I suppose this would also be proof of the existence of god, using the OP's logic.

 

[Falvlun]

Just found this tidbit regarding Powerball:

"The Powerball drawing on March 30, 2005 produced 110 second-prize winners. The total payout to these winners was $19,400,000, with 89 winners each receiving $100,000. The other 21 winners received $500,000, as they were Power Play selections.

MUSL officials initially suspected fraud or a reporting error. However, all 110 winners had played numbers from fortune cookies made by Wonton Food Inc. of Long Island City, New York."

I suppose this would also be proof of the existence of god, using the OP's logic.

Oh, that is so awesome. You produce a billion fortune cookies, chances are, one of those darn things is gonna end up right.

(And it's amazing how easily we forget about the other 999,999,999 that were not.)

 

[IHaveTheGift]

I've spent too much time reading about cognitive bias to have any faith left in the human mind to accurately record and relate accurate information.

Then how can you even be sure that you might have completely overlooked an obvious miracle of God in your life?

You are kind of making a hypocrite of yourself
You are completely dumbing down the human mind and using your human mind to do it from things you read that you say the human mind cant accurately record you doing.

Man I really wish to reply to some of you here, but I have two active threads going and weighing in the replies, I have to choose ones that I like more, obvious.
Not so much as like, but ones most I deem relevant such as this one.

Someone else said something about rejected natural explanations prematurely.
How did I do that?
I weighed in everything as I was talking to the woman and my brain clicked and clicked clicked all the options.
I didnt even take her last dollar to play for myself.
So obviously I didnt believe it would come out.
later when it turned out she won, I then deemed my opinion to it.
tons of people were all talking about it.
Tons of explanations were discussed.
Everyone deemed the same thing.
Everyone in the apt complex.
I didnt discuss it here though.
Ad popuar is why, i knew that would come up.

My atheist cousins though, when I told them, said that was am amazing story, but they remain atheist to this day.

I am saying it now though, because nothing was deemed premature.
Its not like she told me about the dream and bing, God.
Nope.
She didn't win yet, that came hours later.
Everyone who found out went nuts over it.
I think about 5-10 people knew about the dream.

later that day, hundreds learned of it and it snowballed.

Thank you to all that are keeping this thread going and your interesting posts.
I cant possibly keep up with them all.
PM me if you have something that you really really really want an answer that I haven't said yet to an unknwon question.

Hopes my PM box doesn't explode :thud:

I've only asked you to explain your reasoning. You're wasting a lot of breath going on a tirade against me instead of answering a very simple question.

1: You knew an old woman who dreamed of three numbers, played the lotto with them and won.
2: ????????????????
3: Therefore your religion is true.

What goes in number 2? You say you've considered many possibilities, but you haven't told us any of them, or why you elected to dismiss them in favour of affirming your preexisting theistic inclinations.

Moreover, you're overtly defensive and hostile toward anyone who presents a more plausible explanation - that your memory is flawed, or that it was a nifty coincidence, or that we can experience glimpses of the future without divine intervention because spacetime is non-linear in some way.

No, I asked you in the other thread to re ask what you needed to know and I would reply to you, you didn't do that, I checked all new posts.

I replied to what you did post though, about human brains.
You made a point and I replied to it.
And posted about what some else said too.

I just realized, it was more info about the OP that you wish me to explain and you are not even addressing it and saying I am still not replying to your needs to know more info.
I did just do that, while replying to someone else as well to you about what you said about brains.

Plus, in the other thread, you said stuff about me complaining about people being unfair and here you are doing what you are claiming I did.

This makes four times now you claimed stuff that is going on is backwards to what is actually going on.

Guess what?
ignored.

You are done wasting my time.

edit, I combined both posts together, clearly, you must be trolling or idk what you are doing at this point
You replied to my post on two things that I discussed, you ignored the part where you discussed brains, claim I am not giving you the (2) part of what you asked.
But its right there in the post you replied to.
You almost have to be trolling.
Specially when I think about you claiming in the other thread that I am completely ignoring you.
I am not going to count them all up, but at least 5 times now, you are turning everything around about what is actually going on.
It is way more than 5 but right here is 5 times you completely misrepresent the true realty of what I am actually doing.

Reply to my giving you the (2) part of the question right in the post where I gave you even more info you asked for.
Yes, you're trolling me and completely wasting my time.
Again, you are put on ignore.

 

[IHaveTheGift]

Just found this tidbit regarding Powerball:

"The Powerball drawing on March 30, 2005 produced 110 second-prize winners. The total payout to these winners was $19,400,000, with 89 winners each receiving $100,000. The other 21 winners received $500,000, as they were Power Play selections.

MUSL officials initially suspected fraud or a reporting error. However, all 110 winners had played numbers from fortune cookies made by Wonton Food Inc. of Long Island City, New York."

I suppose this would also be proof of the existence of god, using the OP's logic.

I wouldn't deem that of God and it is not even remotely the same concept.
That shows that if enough people play, some have the potential to win and did.

My op is one person, who never played before and woke up the the exact number drilled in your head after praying for God to help he get a washer.

You don't have to take that stance though.
I posted the OP so others can discuss.
I gave my position, I feel it merits God, not proves though.

If this is not such a interesting topic, why is there so much activity in it?
I didn't expect it to, but am glad I helped people lead to interesting discussion.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

If this is not such a interesting topic, why is there so much activity in it?
I didn't expect it to, but am glad I helped people lead to interesting discussion.

Many of us have an odd fascination with peoples' irrationality and illogic.

 

[Sunstone]

For the sake of discussion, let's assume the story in the OP is actual evidence of deity. If that is indeed the case, then it might be interesting to note that, on the same day that deity miraculously took care of a woman in need of a new washer, perhaps up to 18,000 children worldwide died of starvation. Quite an interesting take on the priorities of deities.