Can the "supernatural" be detected and influenced?

[Hee_Zen]

Sounds to me like you’re a quintessential skeptic so not sure what I can tell you. I wonder if you put any stock in personal testimony of individuals.

I am a skeptic, but I am willing to listen to others. Considering the testimony of others, I may be willing to accept what they say if their story is “believable”. For example , if someone claims that they won 10 bucks on the lottery, then I simply accept their word. If they say that they won 200 million on Powerball, then I stay skeptical until they present evidence. You see, it all depends.

You didn’t see it yourself with your own eyes, etc. so how do you know for sure if it’s true?

As I said above, there is always an internal “line” which separates the “absurd stories” from the “likely ones” and this line is not “volitional”. One cannot come to a decision that from now of one will believe that there really is a Santa Klaus. It does not mean that the absurd ones are definitely untrue, it only means that one needs evidence before one accepts hem.

There have been individuals who have gotten involved with the occult, worship of fallen angels, themselves becoming possessed, and then repented of their ways and turned back to God, but those are just stories. I don’t suppose you would put much stock in them.

I sure do not. Just like I discard the testimonials of abductions by space aliens, the Loch Ness monster, claims about telekinesis, and a whole lot of other claims - none of which is supported by actual evidence.

Faith is something of a choice, it seems to me. I’m curious, have you ever tried praying?

Of course. I used to be a believer. No prayer was ever answered in any fashion which I could recognize as an “answer”.

 

[JamalChristophr]

I am a skeptic, but I am willing to listen to others. Considering the testimony of others, I may be willing to accept what they say if their story is “believable”. For example , if someone claims that they won 10 bucks on the lottery, then I simply accept their word. If they say that they won 200 million on Powerball, then I stay skeptical until they present evidence. You see, it all depends.

As I said above, there is always an internal “line” which separates the “absurd stories” from the “likely ones” and this line is not “volitional”. One cannot come to a decision that from now of one will believe that there really is a Santa Klaus. It does not mean that the absurd ones are definitely untrue, it only means that one needs evidence before one accepts hem.

I sure do not. Just like I discard the testimonials of abductions by space aliens, the Loch Ness monster, claims about telekinesis, and a whole lot of other claims - none of which is supported by actual evidence.

Of course. I used to be a believer. No prayer was ever answered in any fashion which I could recognize as an “answer”.

Perhaps you are a descendant of St. Thomas the Apostle as he was a bit of a doubter also.

It kind of seems to me that you could not be convinced of a miracle because you do not believe in miracles. I can relate to what you say, however, about prayers not seeming to get answered… I have been close to where you are now, but I have always, for some reason, chosen to return to a place of faith, even though my prayers did not seem to be answered at times. I have prayed for many things and very often the answer has been either “no” or “wait”.

I do believe in miracles, though. I think one interesting place to look for miracles is at Lourdes. I myself do believe that actual miracles have taken place there that can in no other way be explained by science. But I actually think that if one really and truly tries hard enough it is possible to explain away any miracles. It just takes a lot of effort at times.

I think it’s in any case better to believe than to not believe, but perhaps that is easier said than done depending on one’s personal experiences. I am reminded of Pascal’s wager.

I shall pray for you that you might return to a place of faith. And perhaps I might snoop around for a substantial miracle that has occured at Lourdes which you can discount, either swiftly or with a little more deliberating, depending on the circumstances.

By the way, have you ever heard of the story of the priests- I forget how many it was- who were only about 1 kilometer or so from the epicenter of the Nagasaki blast who survived unscathed? It might have been Hiroshima, I most go and look. Everything else was leveled and no one else survived for miles. A fluke? A fiction? Not in my view. But we as humans do often tend to believe what we wish to believe, I suppose.

It was 8 Jesuits in Hiroshima and a distance of 8 city blocks:
tldm.org/News18/EightJesuitPriestsSurviveHiroshimaAtomicBombBlastThroughThePowerOfTheRosary.htm

As to Lourdes, I’d like to offer the testimony of Dr. Carrel:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexis_Carrel

 

[GaryTaylor]

I am a skeptic,
Of course. I used to be a believer. No prayer was ever answered in any fashion which I could recognize as an “answer”.

How do you know you didn’t quit just before the supernatural event? How do you know your prayer was never answered according to the Lords will and not yours? There are only two ways to know God. You failed on the first and are in denial of the second. Usually the only alternative is prayer [intercession]. Someone has been praying for you, your here?

I’m gonna call that supernatural and add a prayer to it!!

 

[Sparkythedog]

Supernatural covers a broad range of phenomena. People have observed objects spontaneously fly from their resting place to a spot across a room, multiple times. People have been driven from their homes due to this. There are also reports of either ghostly or apparently real looking people appearing in homes and disappearing.

I still don’t have a good idea of what supernatural means. Why would an object moving or flying for an unknown reason be considered supernatural? Similarly, why would people who appear and disapear for unknown reasons be considered supernatural?

Supernatural, in these two examples, seems to be a placeholder for “I don’t know…”. It does not seem to be a coherent category of objects or phenomena.

 

[edwest2]

I still don’t have a good idea of what supernatural means. Why would an object moving or flying for an unknown reason be considered supernatural? Similarly, why would people who appear and disapear for unknown reasons be considered supernatural?

Supernatural, in these two examples, seems to be a placeholder for “I don’t know…”. It does not seem to be a coherent category of objects or phenomena.

It certainly is a coherent category. In this case, the word supernatural means beyond what nature can actually do. There is a defined list of occurrences where natural explanations do not apply. I’ve been studying this for years.

Ed

 

[Sparkythedog]

It certainly is a coherent category. In this case, the word supernatural means beyond what nature can actually do. There is a defined list of occurrences where natural explanations do not apply. I’ve been studying this for years.

Ed

There are several issues with this explanation.

The first has to do with the contrast between natural and supernatural. What does it mean to be natural? Natural colloquially means “anything not man made”. There are generally clear boundaries here. But what is the boundary between natural and supernatural? What are qualities of something supernatural? How did we determine these qualities?

The second problem with this definition is that it’s an argument from incredulity. “I don’t know how an object could unexpectedly fly off a table, therefore its explanation isn’t natural.” This doesn’t explain anything about the event. But this could apply to many things. It’s just a label for “I don’t know”.

What are the qualities of the supernatural?

 

[Aquinas21]

1. I think that the word ‘nature’ in this context refers to the natural universe, which has four dimensions (3 physical dimensions plus time). The supernatural dimension is primarily a non-physical 5th dimension, or at least that’s a good phrase or comparison to use for the supernatural. The 5th dimension is a permanent spiritual dimension, capable of existing without the other four dimensions and not merely reducible to them.
2. This is not a wild, strange, or esoteric theory. This is a standard, basic, normal affirmation of metaphysical idealism throughout the entire history of philosophy. The 5th dimension is primarily the dimension of God (or the Absolute or Infinite Spirit), and we as human beings (finite spirits) have at least some intrinsic affinity with this dimension. It’s a realm of many good positive aspects, as for example moral values and transcendentals. If people mention paranormal or preternatural aspects (or negative aspects), they are merely mentioning the slums or backwaters or lower levels of this glorious positive spiritual dimension. By the way, I use Wikipedia links fairly often not because they are perfect but just because they are convenient and they are better than nothing.
3. The Great Divide (so to speak) in the history of philosophy is between materialism and idealism. Which is more fundamental or ultimately more important, Matter or Spirit? Materialism (or naturalism or skepticism or strict empiricism or epiphenomenalism or secularism) says that there are only four real dimensions (or at least that’s all that are humanly knowable). Idealism (or rationalism or transcendentalism or other similar names) says that there is also a real 5th dimension, meaning that Spirit is just as important as Matter (and ultimately more important).
4. There are three ways (at least) to arrive at the idealistic affirmation. A difficult way is to take academic courses in metaphysics and study large textbooks in this area. Another difficult way is to take your studies in macrophysics (astronomy) or microphysics (sub-atomic particles, etc.) as far as they will go, all the way to their limits, and find that Absolute Spirit is there at the limits looking at you (so to speak). An easier way is to pay some attention to the humanities generally and ‘get the message’ (so to speak) concerning human existence that is conveyed by fine arts, performing arts, music, literature, poetry, religion, and all the rest. We (as thinking human beings in a world of experiences and values) can ‘get the message’ that we are part of something larger and more meaningful (not merely limited to the spatio-temporal natural universe).
5. Can we ‘detect’ this dimension? Yes, if we are using a ‘good browser’ (to use a computer or Internet analogy) for human experience. Can we ‘influence’ this dimension? Yes, although we are merely finite spirits so obviously we are rather small in the grand scheme of everything. Does the 5th dimension sometimes influence us (or make itself present to us, or converge and intersect with the natural universe)? Yes of course, and not just generally in terms of some degree of divine immanence (counterbalance of divine transcendence) but also in special ways (sometimes tangible, sometimes intangible). As the saying goes, “the miracles of earth are the laws of heaven”, as represented for example by this picture of a Blessed Sacrament Chapel at a large Basilica in Washington, D.C…

attribution public domain

 

[Frankenfurter]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[fred_conty]

Science cannot prove (yet) the activity of the supernatural.

For the simple reason that other reasons are always used to explain everything away.

Even photos…miracles…

Even the miracles of Jesus himself did not prove that he was God to some who saw him perform them. Can it get any stronger than that?

A twinkling of faith is needed.

 

[rossum]

Can the “supernatural” be detected and influenced?

I would say that the supernatural can be detected by science if, and only if, it has a non-supernatural effect.

“If a princess wearing a green dress kisses a frog on a Tuesday, then the frog will turn into a prince.”

That is observable, detectable and amenable to study. Does she have to be a princess, will a duchess do? Can the dress be blue instead of green? What about blue jeans? Science can take over and examine all that stuff to work out a lot of detail. But it can only do so if there is a physical effect to observe; the frog really does turn into a prince.

Science being science, it has already done some work along those lines, such as: Study of the Therapeutic Effects of Intercessory Prayer (STEP) in cardiac bypass patients

CONCLUSIONS: Intercessory prayer itself had no effect on complication-free recovery from CABG (coronary artery bypass graft)

So far all scientific attempts to detect a real natural effect from the supernatural have failed.

This is not surprising. If prayers to Vishnu worked more frequently than prayers to Amaterasu, then Vishnu’s popularity would increase greatly. As it is, there is no evidence that prayer to any specific god/ess work better than prayers to any other deity.

rossum

 

[Aloysium]

. . . So far all scientific attempts to detect a real natural effect from the supernatural have failed.

This is not surprising. If prayers to Vishnu worked more frequently than prayers to Amaterasu, then Vishnu’s popularity would increase greatly. As it is, there is no evidence that prayer to any specific god/ess work better than prayers to any other deity.

rossum

I can’t see anyone being surprised about any of this, other than how someone wasted their time and grant money.

Deut 6:15-17 . . . for the LORD your God in the midst of you is a jealous God; otherwise the anger of the LORD your God will be kindled against you, and He will wipe you off the face of the earth. "You shall not put the LORD your God to the test, as you tested Him at Massah. "You should diligently keep the commandments of the LORD your God, and His testimonies and His statutes which He has commanded you.…

Matt 4:7 Jesus answered him, “It is also written: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’”

Luke 4:12 Jesus answered, “It is said: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’”

 

[Ositokc]

Good magicians can absolutely influence your perceptions. One’s senses can be deceived quite easily. It’s about wanting to believe. For instance I did see David Copperfield literally fly on stage, I was absolutely sure of it, but does that mean he really flew?

The paranormal and supernatural will always be a source of debate and wonder, but as mentioned you cannot scientifically prove their existence, and conversely their nonexistence. A great mystery indeed.

 

[rossum]

I can’t see anyone being surprised about any of this, other than how someone wasted their time and grant money.

I strongly disagree. A negative result from an experiment can be extremely significant. Witness the Michaelson-Morley experiment.

rossum

 

[Hee_Zen]

I would say that the supernatural can be detected by science if, and only if, it has a non-supernatural effect.

Very well said.

 

[Aloysium]

I strongly disagree. A negative result from an experiment can be extremely significant. Witness the Michaelson-Morley experiment.

rossum

You did not understand me. The experiment supported the claim that you cannot test God.

 

[Frankenfurter]

This seems very relevant (Luke 5:23)

22But Jesus, aware of their reasonings, answered and said to them, “Why are you reasoning in your hearts? 23"Which is easier, to say, ‘Your sins have been forgiven you,’ or to say, 'Get up and walk '? 24"But, so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins,”-- He said to the paralytic-- “I say to you, get up, and pick up your stretcher and go home.”

I always meditate on this and realize that the miracle, or proof that people want to see is something that they can’t explain, like a healing in this case. ‘Get up and walk’.

Some folks are convinced that Jesus is God only because he does a miracle (to them anyway) that clinches it for them. In fact, from our modern perspective, we know that so much of what we have technologically, would have looked like a miracle to these same folks.

Any man-made test of God will always fail because of our limitations. That is the problem with arguing with atheists. They set up a problem, for which, by their own definition of the problem, cannot be solved.

However, when Jesus does the harder thing, and forgives your sins. You will know this so deep within yourself that it could only have come from God.

 

[rossum]

You did not understand me. The experiment supported the claim that you cannot test God.

The experiment also supported the claim that praying to God does not affect medical outcomes.

There are many different possible claims that can be made on the basis of the experiment, for example, that Loki/Trickster intervened undetectably to influence the result of the experiment.

Science generally will go with the simplest claim – intercessory prayer had no measurable medical effect.

rossum

 

[Aloysium]

Like I said, the study was a useless waste of time.

 

[Aloysium]

God is not a puppet.

 

[Hee_Zen]

God is not a puppet.

If, so then why do theists assert that “ask and the door will be opened”? And “**whatever **you ask in my name will be fulfilled because I ill will go the Father”? Jesus’ own words, I am afraid. Which part of “whatever” don’t you understand?