Why ... (2)

[Cheeky Monkey]

How do you know that you know of no supernatural measurements? Do you know anything about gravity? Gravity is not a material entity. We measure gravity but there is no evidence of gravity except for the measurements of the result of it. Do we measure Strong force? Where is strong force? What is strong force? What is weak force? Until you understand what all things are, you can not claim to know that we don't measure the supernatural. To conclude that the supernatural can't be measured is not based on any evidence to the contrary and only based on your opinion. Correct?

What makes gravity or the strong force supernatural?

 

[Oncedeceived]

What makes gravity or the strong force supernatural?

How can you know it isn't?

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

How can you know it isn't?

I didn't claim it wasn't. I claimed I knew of nothing showing that it is.

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

Humans are made by an intelligence, so that is not supernatural.

I have evidence that humans make shoes and that humans make robots. There's no evidence that an intelligence (an abstract quality) made anything, let alone humans.

 

[Oncedeceived]

I didn't claim it wasn't. I claimed I knew of nothing showing that it is.

Ok, so we can assume since we can't show that it is or isn't we can't make the proclamation that the supernatural can not or has not been measured. Do you concur?

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

Ok, so we can assume since we can't show that it is or isn't we can't make the proclamation that the supernatural can not or has not been measured. Do you concur?

The supernatural hasn't been measured in the sense that there is no unit of supernaturals nor and supernaturalthermometer or supernaturaltelescope. If you just call observed phenomena "supernatural" I'd need to know on what basis?

 

[Oncedeceived]

The supernatural hasn't been measured in the sense that there is no unit of supernaturals nor and supernaturalthermometer or supernaturaltelescope. If you just call observed phenomena "supernatural" I'd need to know on what basis?

Well Cheeky it was your claim my friend. You claimed that it has never been measured. I think we have determined we can't really be assured that to be the case.

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

Well Cheeky it was your claim my friend. You claimed that it has never been measured. I think we have determined we can't really be assured that to be the case.

Well there are no measurements of 5.6 supernaturals per hour or whatever so I think the claim stands.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Well there are no measurements of 5.6 supernaturals per hour or whatever so I think the claim stands.

Again, how do you know? Aren't you making a supra-natural declaration?

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

Again, how do you know? Aren't you making a supra-natural declaration?

I don't think so. If I said there's been no measurement of the population of Loch Ness Monsters would it seem reasonable to say that it might have accidentally been measured when counting otters?

 

[Oncedeceived]

I don't think so. If I said there's been no measurement of the population of Loch Ness Monsters would it seem reasonable to say that it might have accidentally been measured when counting otters?

I think that we both know that this is far from a genuine analogy. Placing gravity or any other intricate complex force to that of a Loch Ness monster is far from a sincere appraisal of the two.

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

I think that we both know that this is far from a genuine analogy. Placing gravity or any other intricate complex force to that of a Loch Ness monster is far from a sincere appraisal of the two.

Gravity is like the otters. The thing we actually observe and measure.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Gravity is like the otters. The thing we actually observe and measure.

Yes, I understood. But you don't observe gravity. You observe the result of it.

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

Yes, I understood. But you don't observe gravity. You observe the result of it.

Well by the same token I don't observe otters either, just photons hitting my retina.

Come to think of it they could be nyads disguised as otters.

 

[EternalDragon]

I have evidence that humans make shoes and that humans make robots. There's no evidence that an intelligence (an abstract quality) made anything, let alone humans.

So if God didn't make it and nature (evolution being also an abstract quality) didn't make it then where did it come from? ("It" being everything in existence).

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

So if God didn't make it and nature (evolution being also an abstract quality) didn't make it then where did it come from?

Biological evolution is a process. Like erosion or flow or turbulence. It is both observable and measurable. Your argument is basically "I don't know therefore supernatural".

 

[Oncedeceived]

Well by the same token I don't observe otters either, just photons hitting my retina.

Come to think of it they could be nyads disguised as otters.

So we can then assume that reality has no determination and we are just floundering in a pool of illusion. Might as well.

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

So we can then assume that reality has no determination and we are just floundering in a pool of illusion. Might as well.

I think that would be the case if we admit supernatural answers.

 

[Oncedeceived]

I think that would be the case if we admit supernatural answers.

What about the otters in disguise? That has no supernatural properties, yet you thought they might be nyads. Did you mean Diana or do you expect gifts from them?

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

What about the otters in disguise? That has no supernatural properties, yet you thought they might be nyads. Did you mean Diana or do you expect gifts from them?

I try to be pragmatic about it. While I haven't gone through a lot of tests my sense is that I should trust a mechanic who offers natural explanations for car problems and a physical rational way of fixing it. It may be that a mechanic that believes in gremlins and offers an incantation to fix my car is better but I'd like to see some solid evidence for that. It may be that otters are nyads and gravity is angels pushing the planets around but in my experience this hasn't proved to be a successful program for understanding the world and remains lacking in any empirical demonstration or measurement.