This would be a good topic.I’d be interested in how you go about looking at a claim of the supernatural.
For debate...
How should we handle claims involving the supernatural?
This would be a good topic.I’d be interested in how you go about looking at a claim of the supernatural.
In general, I accept that all intellectual matters should be handled with logic and evidence. If something can not be disproven, then I remain agnostic. Also, to be practical, I don't limit myself to science just as historians don't limit themselves to science. The events involved with the supernatural are often beyond the scope of what scientists can deal with (replications or repeated occurrences, lab controls, etc) so limiting yourself to science sets you up to fail. This all-or-nothing approach by some (it has to be confirmed by science or its dismissed) leaves us in ignorance about a matter that most of us wants to know about. So to be practical, I think it is necessary to adopt some less-than scientific standards for the supernatural. Even in using science we are settling for a lesser standard when you really think about it. The ultimate standard for validity is having absolute truth/certainty. Even scientists can't offer us that, but we still use science to acquire about the Universe for practical reasons.How should we handle claims involving the supernatural?
Yes, I tend to agree, because the supernatural is likely to be occasional.So to be practical, I think it is necessary to adopt some less-than scientific standards for the supernatural.
I once was having a cigarette and a cuppa on my front porch. It was a half hour before dawn. In the sky at about 30 degrees angle, there suddenly appeared a white light that looked slightly brighter [and bigger] than the brightest star in the sky. As soon as it appeared [seemingly out of nowhere] it began to slowly move toward the right [north] of my position and continued to do this for many seconds.Yes, I tend to agree, because the supernatural is likely to be occasional.
Okay, I’d be interested in how rocks falling from the sky moved from urban legend (and/or rural legend!!) to accepted scientific fact.
And maybe compared to UFOs, which merely means unidentified— But which is usually taken to mean aliens from other planets.
And then frankly, it conflicts with my world view. Because why would teenage aliens be interested in frequently buzzing our planet right at the edge of us being able to see something?
In any case, I think there is a good contrast-and-compare between meteorites and UFOs.
Ah, so it sounds like the mystery remains.. . . and as I was marveling at this thing I had witnessed, Lo! Another light exactly the same as the first light, appeared in exactly the same spot in the sky as the first light had appeared a minute before. . .
To Add To That
I'm Atheist only to avo--
So to be practical, I think it is necessary to adopt some less-than scientific standards for the supernatural. Even in using science we are settling for a lesser standard when you really think about it. The ultimate standard for validity is having absolute truth/certainty. Even scientists can't offer us that, but we still use science to acquire about the Universe for practical reasons.
In William's case of his witnessing an ultra-bright light before dawn, I too have experienced such a light. I've finally concluded that it was probably a meteorite coming directly toward me.
The thing about UFOs is that it is often related to natural causes rather than supernatural ones.This reminds me of how governments and skeptics have dealt with UFO claims. The government needs to know about them but because of a stigma and limited scientific options for it, we tend to just leave it alone. But recently that has changed since some experts are starting to accept the existence of UFOs based only on scientific observations, as opposed to accepting it after it goes through the other scientific processes (i.e. experimentation, replication, etc.)