The Nature of the Supernatural

[Unveiled Artist]

Cannot =/= Has not.

What are you referring to?

 

[Taylor Seraphim]

Supernatural, according to Merriam, "is unable to be explained by science or the laws of nature : of, relating to, or seeming to come from magic, a god, etc."

There are a lot of things that cannot be explained by science or the laws of nature. So, in that respect, since we do not know everything about our planet and universe (and sorry to add this: we are not god), then anything we cant explain is, um, supernatural.

Just because we do not know something right now does not mean that we are unable to or cannot explain it.

 

[Erebus]

I dislike the word supernatural in general. In my view, nothing can be above, beyond or outside nature as nature itself is all-encompassing. Were the dead to rise from their graves tomorrow, such an event wouldn't be in any way beyond nature. It would simply mean our understanding of what it is to be a corpse was flawed.

That brings me on to the next point. I don't find "unexplained/unexplainable by science" a particularly useful definition of supernatural either. This would seem to imply that things cease to be supernatural once they're quantified. If that's the case, why describe them as supernatural in the first place? I guess this one's more a matter of personal preference really.

So how/when would I use the word "supernatural?"

Well, I generally don't. I have on occasion used it as a very vague blanket term to cover ghosts, psychic powers and a few other things. In these cases, it'll only be used to give somebody the broad gist of a topic and isn't supposed to really be examined in detail.

 

[arthra]

Well I think the "natural" and the "supernatural" are on the same continuum... We ourselves are supernatural beings. We experience the natural expected phenomenau of every day life and then there is the supernatural. Things we daily take for granted can be quite miraculous from another point of view.

...The world of man is supernatural in its relation to the vegetable kingdom, though in reality it is not so. Relatively to the plant, the reality of man, his power of hearing and sight, are all supernatural, and for the plant to comprehend that reality and the nature of the powers of man's mind is impossible. In like manner for man to comprehend the Divine Essence and the nature of the great Hereafter is in no wise possible. The merciful outpourings of that Divine Essence, however, are vouchsafed unto all beings and it is incumbent upon man to ponder in his heart upon the effusions of the Divine Grace, the soul being counted as one, rather than upon the Divine Essence itself.

(Abdu'l-Baha, Tablet to August Forel, p. 23)

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Just because we do not know something right now does not mean that we are unable to or cannot explain it.

I didn't get your alert. That's what the dictionary said, though. It says the supernatural is what we do not know...what's beyond our knowledge. Based on what Marriam says (not me), she basically says: there are a lot of things that cannot be explained by science or the laws of nature. So, in that respect, since we do not know everything about our planet and universe (and sorry to add this: we are not god), then anything we cant explain is, um, supernatural.

Based on that definition, that's basically the conclusion I got. Anything we can't explain, is, um (according to the dictionary), supernatural.

Do I believe that? No. I do not believe the supernatural exists only in movies etc.

 

[Taylor Seraphim]

I didn't get your alert. That's what the dictionary said, though. It says the supernatural is what we do not know...what's beyond our knowledge. Based on what Marriam says (not me), she basically says: there are a lot of things that cannot be explained by science or the laws of nature. So, in that respect, since we do not know everything about our planet and universe (and sorry to add this: we are not god), then anything we cant explain is, um, supernatural.

Based on that definition, that's basically the conclusion I got. Anything we can't explain, is, um (according to the dictionary), supernatural.

Do I believe that? No. I do not believe the supernatural exists only in movies etc.

Re-read my post please.

 

[Taylor Seraphim]

Well I think the "natural" and the "supernatural" are on the same continuum... We ourselves are supernatural beings. We experience the natural expected phenomenau of every day life and then there is the supernatural. Things we daily take for granted can be quite miraculous from another point of view.

...The world of man is supernatural in its relation to the vegetable kingdom, though in reality it is not so. Relatively to the plant, the reality of man, his power of hearing and sight, are all supernatural, and for the plant to comprehend that reality and the nature of the powers of man's mind is impossible. In like manner for man to comprehend the Divine Essence and the nature of the great Hereafter is in no wise possible. The merciful outpourings of that Divine Essence, however, are vouchsafed unto all beings and it is incumbent upon man to ponder in his heart upon the effusions of the Divine Grace, the soul being counted as one, rather than upon the Divine Essence itself.

(Abdu'l-Baha, Tablet to August Forel, p. 23)

@Artha, quoting scripture that the other people in the conversation do not believe in or find relevant to the conversation is not an effective tactic for discussion.

 

[Neo Deist]

Supernatural is a good TV show. Beyond that, it does not exist.

 

[arthra]

@Artha, quoting scripture that the other people in the conversation do not believe in or find relevant to the conversation is not an effective tactic for discussion.

Thanks for your post Taylor! I wasn't quoting "scripture" but an excerpt in a letter from Abdul-Baha to August Forel just for general discussion...

Hope you enjoyed it!

 

[Taylor Seraphim]

Thanks for your post Taylor! I wasn't quoting "scripture" but an excerpt in a letter from Abdul-Baha to August Forel just for general discussion...

Hope you enjoyed it!

Its effectively the same.

 

[arthra]

Taylor,

This is a Comparative Religion board...we can share here...

 

[ak.yonathan]

I disagree with the definition of supernatural being listed here. Science should be able to explain everything that occurs in reality. If there is something that science cannot explain then it is not real. I think a more correct definition would be not being able to be explained by physics. If you say the supernatural is that which is beyond physics, than I agree.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I disagree with the definition of supernatural being listed here. Science should be able to explain everything that occurs in reality. If there is something that science cannot explain then it is not real. I think a more correct definition would be not being able to be explained by physics. If you say the supernatural is that which is beyond physics, than I agree.

I had to read this a couple of times. If science cannot explain [it] then it is not real? Real to us or just doesn't exist at all?

 

[ak.yonathan]

I had to read this a couple of times. If science cannot explain [it] then it is not real? Real to us or just doesn't exist at all?

What's the distinction? If it is not real to us, e. g. it doesn't affect us at all, than it doesn't exist at all. Anything that can affect us, whether positively (increase pleasure) or negatively (increase suffering) must be real. It might not exist yet, but it can and will.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

What's the distinction? If it is not real to us, e. g. it doesn't affect us at all, than it doesn't exist at all. Anything that can affect us, whether positively (increase pleasure) or negatively (increase suffering) must be real. It might not exist yet, but it can and will.

If it isn't real to us, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. We are just not aware of it. In some cases, we will never be aware of it. Maybe a glimpse; however, that doesn't mean it (whatever) doesn't exist. Just means we are not the center of the universe (or everything that exist must evolve around our awareness) type of thing.

If there was a pen lying outside my door on the floor, and I'm comfy in my living room, since I am not aware of it, it doesn't exist to me. However, what if it was outside my door? Say that it existed and was there. It made no difference whether I knew it or not. My existence doesn't revolve around the existence of this pen (you, Joe Smoe, a tree). We are interconnected, yes; and, people die everyday without knowing there is a real John Smith and Jane Doe on the planet.

I wouldn't put reality in the hands of science (whatever that really means). Let reality just be. Supernatural exist just as the natural, I just don't know the difference between the two. If it exists, it's real. Scientist and I don't need to know or be around something for it to exist.

Basically, we are on the edge of imagination. I wouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water, though (positive idiom).

 

[ak.yonathan]

Traditionally, 'supernatural', is just a descriptive word used for things that are outside the 'norm', of natural experience. Recently, people have been using the word to describe religious concepts, and in this regard, it becomes sort of a arbitrary word. Religious ideas tend to have a /or can have', contexts that are not related to ''supernatural', inference; and thusly, conflating the word, with things that really aren't ''supernatural'', it confuses the meaning of the word. //ie giving the word more than one meaning, basically. Nothing wrong with the word, itself, it's misuse of the word, that is causing the problems ///in definition

I think that quantum mechanics is the term you're looking for for things outside of the norm of natural experience. Also, since we're talking about natural than all forms of technology would fall under your definition since nature does not produce any form of technology on its own.

 

[ak.yonathan]

So, you are proposing that word 'supernatural', should not be used, in any context?

No, I'm just saying.

That is subjective, because it depends on whether you consider technology to be a natural by-product of /invention, so forth.

As far as I know all technology is artificial.

 

[ak.yonathan]

Sure, but it really is also just an assertion, without much meaning besides, 'we have a word that encompasses anthing ''supernatural'', and it's this. It's similar to 'naturalism', assertions, where the ''arguments', are based on word definitions. //pizza doesn't exist because it's actually called cabbage, or whatever, ie what's the point of changing the words used, in the first place. It doesn't change the concepts. Religious people never used the word ''supernatural'', for their beliefs, /some might, now./


Why is that?

I'm not sure what you're trying to ask here.

 

[arthra]

Science should be able to explain everything that occurs in reality. If there is something that science cannot explain then it is not real.

Science makes an effort to explain things and should...but it is a "process" of investigation and admits there is still more to learn and discover.

 

[ak.yonathan]

Science makes an effort to explain things and should...but it is a "process" of investigation and admits there is still more to learn and discover.

So are you saying that science doesn't have any limits whatsoever?