Go back
Sprituality vs Religion

Sprituality vs Religion

Science

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by twhitehead
Your ignorance of science should not lead you to dictate to others that they are misrepresenting it.
To be corrected on your mistake, in public, by your intellectual inferior! That must really sting.


Originally posted by apathist
To be corrected on your mistake, in public, by your intellectual inferior! That must really sting.
His giant ego will allow him to comfortably move on. 🙂

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by apathist
"Supernatural is just nature we don't understand yet."
apathist
We don't yet understand high temperature superconductivity -so high temperature superconductivity is "supernatural"? Rubbish!


Originally posted by apathist
To be corrected on your mistake, in public, by your intellectual inferior! That must really sting.
To be caught talking nonsense in public, by your intellectual superior, that must really sting.

2 edits

Originally posted by chaney3
His giant ego will allow him to comfortably move on. 🙂
Your giant propensity for lying and talking nonsense will allow you to say just about anything without shame. ( I suspect a few drinks helped you along )

Just because people are obviously smarter than you, it does not follow that they have giant egos. That's just your own insecurity talking.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by humy
We don't yet understand high temperature superconductivity -so high temperature superconductivity is "supernatural"? Rubbish!
Good point. In fairness though, I never said that anything currently unexplained should be considered supernatural.

Maybe I should tweak my quote to match the pattern of the Clarke quote.

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic"
~Clarke

Any sufficiently mysterious natural event is indistinguishable from the supernatural

or maybe

Any sufficiently unknown natural event is indistinguishable from the supernatural
~apathist

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by apathist
Any sufficiently unknown natural event is indistinguishable from the supernatural
~apathist
Anything sufficiently unknown is unknown. Something of a tautology if you ask me.
As for 'supernatural' I bet you cannot define it in a meaningful way.

Vote Up
Vote Down

All I'm saying, really, is that if there is an afterlife, or karma, or etc - they would be natural.

1 edit

Originally posted by apathist
No simplistic bias there!
No, none. They are essentially definitions. Your retort rather than counter argument suggests you know that full well.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by apathist
All I'm saying, really, is that if there is an afterlife, or karma, or etc - they would be natural.
Which is why 'supernatural' is inherently incoherent.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by twhitehead
Anything sufficiently unknown is unknown. Something of a tautology if you ask me.
As for 'supernatural' I bet you cannot define it in a meaningful way.
supernatural: any natural event undetectable to current science.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
You've just highlighted my reluctance to use the word 'spiritual' to describe natural occurrences of 'sentience.'
I too am reluctant to use it. But when a scientist talks of having a spiritual experience while looking at Jupiter through a telescope, I understand what they mean and do not automatically take it to be a religious experience. I would typically not describe it that way myself.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by twhitehead
No, none. They are essentially definitions.
Atheism: a belief system that results in an eternity in Hell.

Essentially a definition. Obviously biased, though, just like your definition for 'religion'.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by apathist
supernatural: any natural event undetectable to current science.
So like the continents on the second planet around Alpha Centuri?
Anyway, my challenge was not to just make up any definition as you could merely say:
supernatural: grass that is a metre high.
My challenge was to give a definition that meets common usage but remains coherent.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by twhitehead
Anything sufficiently unknown is unknown.
Good! And for the Clarke quote:

Anything really amazing is really amazing. Kinda tautological, Mr. Clarke.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.