Supernatural
ControversyAdherents of supernatural beliefs hold that such occurences exist just as surely as does the natural world, whereas opponents, typically materialists and empiricists, argue that there are natural, physical explanations for all such occurences, summed up as
So, if something 'supernatural' exists, it must by definition not be supernatural. And only magical thinking that power could come from where power could not come from could contend otherwise. i.e. a contradiction in itself. The question is where may power come from, or if there are other as of yet confirmed or understood places where power comes from. i.e. likewise, for if bigfoot is found and confirmed, he will not be mysterious or supernatural. In the past, people doubted the existence of the rhinocerous. There is little present belief in the existence of the Unicorn. Certainly there may always be things outside of the realm of human understanding, or as of yet unconfirmed and dubious in existence, and some might term these 'supernatural.'
Views on the supernatural as...
Arguments in favor of a supernatural realityMany proponents believe that the complexities and mysteries of the universe cannot be explained by naturalistic explanations alone and argue that it is reasonable to assume that a nonnatural entity or entities resolve the unexplained. Proponents[citation needed] note that many of history's greatest scientists, including Galileo, Copernicus, Newton, Faraday, Mendel and Maxwell appear to have believed firmly in a supernatural God. By its own definition, science today is incapable of examining or testing for the existence of things which are untestable. Science concerns itself with what can be measured and seen through observation, logic, and scientific reason. Proponents of supernaturalism claim that their belief system is more flexible, which allows them more diversity in terms of epistemology (ways of understanding knowledge). William Dembski writes: For the theist attempting to understand nature, God as creator is fundamental, the creation is derivative, and nature as the physical part of creation is still further downstream. [1] Arguments against a supernatural realitySome thinkers suggest that if a phenomenon is by definition outside of the realm of science, it therefore cannot be experienced and has by definition no impact on our lives.
Naturalization vs. supernaturalizationSome people believe that supernatural events occur, while others do not. "Naturalization"The neologism naturalize, meaning, "to make natural", is sometimes used to describe the perceived process of denying any supernatural significance to events which another presumes to be supernatural. This perceived process may also be referred to as reductionism or deconstructionism. It rests on the believer's presumption that supernatural events can and do occur; thus, their description as "natural" by the skeptic is seen as a result of a process of deliberate or unconscious denial of any supernatural significance, thus, "naturalization". (This should not be confused with naturalization, the process of voluntarily acquiring citizenship at some time after birth.) "Supernaturalization"The neologism supernaturalize, meaning "to make supernatural", is sometimes used to describe the perceived process of ascribing supernatural causes to events which another presumes to be natural. This perceived process may also be referred to as mythification or spiritualization. It rests on the presumption of the skeptic that supernatural events cannot or are unlikely to occur; thus, their description by the believer as supernatural is seen as the result of a process of deliberate or unconscious mysticism, thus, "supernaturalization". Supernaturalization can also mean the process by which stories and historical accounts are altered to describe supernatural elements. The subjective nature of the issueTwo people may come to completely different conclusions based on identical evidence. One "screens out" possible explanations simply because they conflict with one's paradigm and create dissonance. For example, to make oneself "look good" to others thus avoiding isolation, and perhaps the desire to imitate personal heroes. Generally we criticize and question the picture of reality held by others. It is rare to question one's own, rarer still to admit our own is distorted. Competing Explanations and Criteria of PreferenceFor some people it is not a matter of supernatural events vs. natural events. They are all events but there can be many competing explanations. The question then becomes what criteria shall one use to prefer one explanation over another. One must be careful not to confuse the phenomenon with the explanation. We may agree that a bush has burst into flames, where we may differ is in the explanation of that event. The supernaturalist in that instance prefers the supernatural explanation based on one or a number of criteria of preference. It could be because the explanation includes constructs such as an immortal soul and other purported phenomena such as it rising to a place of great joy upon being released at death and they find this very attractive. The naturalist may prefer the natural explanation because such explanations are required to have predictive power, and being able to predict in a reliable way what will happen when a certain set of circumstances is present is something they find attractive. There are many people that are comfortable with accepting both explanations to satisfy several preferences such as a supernatural explanation that provides comfort from the thought of death and the natural explanation because of its utility in being able to reliably control fire, for example Christians that accept the Theory of Evolution but still explain reality as a deliberate creation of their god. A person may be a naturalist because they are driven by the preference of predictability rather than comfort whereas another person may be a supernaturalist because they prefer explanations that make them feel better about their eventual death rather than how useful they are on actual reality.[citation needed] Alleged instances of supernaturalization
Believers respond to the many instances of supernaturalization by arguing that the fact that supernaturalization often occurs does not refute the existence of the supernatural any more than the fact that scientists often make errors refutes the existence of the natural universe; and that the supernatural by its very nature cannot be explored through science, and must therefore be explored through different means, such as spirituality. Nonbelievers counter that the two forms of explanation cannot be equated, because erroneous naturalistic claims, such as those made for the existence of phlogiston or N-rays, are routinely and often rapidly corrected by reference to nature, while erroneous supernaturalistic claims such as the above are impossible to correct by reference to supernature or by any other widely accepted objective means. And then there are the practical considerations. Explanations based on supernatural constructs have consistently been found to be no better than no explanation at all at predicting outcomes before the fact.[citation needed] Simply on the basis of choosing which explanations work best at not only accounting for reality but predicting it before the fact, natural explanations are to be preferred.[citation needed] Supernatural in FictionThe supernatural is also a topic in various fictional genres, especially horror fiction and fantasy fiction. |