Does the Supernatural exist?

My question would be, "Why would this be true, if it is? Why could some people be more prone to have supernatural experiences than others?" For me, it's just another unanswered question that is simply that: an unanswered question that needs to be answered. Obviously, we're dealing with things that aren't known or proven here, but there's an issue that inevitably comes up when the supernatural is involved: credibility. And sadly, some people like to claim credibility in the unknown, which is completely irresponsible.

As in the case of stigmata, some people buy into that because they simply can't explain it, so it must be real. They want to attribute that to God's great mysteries rather than find out for themselves if the phenomenon is genuine.

As in the case of mediums and psychics, they can't (and don't) explain why they can see or experience the things they can, so they hide behind some kind of false credibility that you and I can't explain - and thus disprove - it either. So they go about their work as if they are genuine (and maybe they are), but it all too easily goes unchallenged.

As in the case of ghosts, some people simply can't explain it, but because they were afraid, and because it matches other "ghostly" encounters they might have heard, they'll use these shallow ideas as evidence that ghosts are real. (And there's something to be said about the conditioning to see or experience ghosts: ever been in a graveyard at night? You expect to be frightened, and you've got the ghost thing in your head; and for that reason, anything and everything you see could potentially be construed as a ghost.)

The reason it makes sense to me that some people are more open to "the supernatural" than others is that some people have better vision than others. Some people are nearly deaf and others can hear frequencies that are rarely percieved by most. If there is a range of intensity in our other senses, why not in percieving this as well?

Also, the vibrations that were mentioned in Golgot's first post could still be a supernatural occurrence. Describing something in scientific terms doesn't change the qualities of the thing itself. As Golgot pointed out later, the most professional in the scientific arena reserve the possibility that there is more to our world than can currently be measured and studied by current means and methods.

While I know there are people who make a living by posing as psychics who are actually performers/hucksters, I also know that there are people who are better at sensing what is going on with another person than others are. And why not? On an atomic level, we're all energy. Our bodies work through electrical impulses. We have all witnessed electrical energy jumping from one solid body to another. Having done so, is it really logical to think it's impossible for that to happen between people?

Lastly, if you believe in evolution, then you believe that all life came from the sea. You are surely aware also that fish don't have ears. Fish "hear" (sense) what is around them by vibrations against their lateral line - a network described variously as "hairs", "pores", "nerves" - which tell them what is in the water around them. It hardly seems a huge leap to think humans could have a similar sensing mechanism for detecting who and what is swimming around our waters.

I offer none of this as proof. Just food for thought.

__________________
Review: Cabin in the Woods 8/10

When I think about human perception, I always think about how human beings tend to "make order out of chaos;" that is, they attribute truth to things that may or may not actually be there.

Example: the Rorschach ink blot test. It's a silly example, but it illustrates what I mean pretty well. You look at the ink blot, and you extract perceptual images from it (airplane, two people kissing, whatever) because that's how you perceive the image. Some people are more likely to see the subtle details, while others only see the simple, uniform shapes. These variations, mixed with the variables of personality, generally determine what the viewer sees. But in the end, it's only a white piece of paper covered with black smudges.

Another example: the glass half-full or half-empty. Apparently, positive personalities see a half-full glass, while the negative personalities see a half-empty glass (which is, again, a matter of differing human perception). But it really is just a glass with an inconsequential amount of liquid in it.

Last night, someone was telling me about a widowed male goose living on her land. He joins the migrating Canadian geese, picks out a goose couple, and helps to protect their young until they move out. Every year, he does this. She calls him "Uncle," and later said, "poor Uncle." And I thought, huh...she's attributing human emotion to this animal's situation, perceiving pain and loneliness and a desire to reconnect. But the goose could simply be carrying out his role by instinct only, because his natural purpose is to be a goose, and do goose things.

The way we sense things is, of course, a variable. Some people see farther, and some people hear better. But it's what we naturally turn our perceptions into that becomes the subject of scrutiny.

When I was young and crazy, I had a Batman tshirt. I think it was black with a yellow Bat image on the front. When I looked at it, I couldn't see the Bat image. It looked like something else, even though I knew it was a Bat image. Sometimes I had to stare awhile before the Bat image became apparent. weird

__________________
My name is Maximus Decimus Meridius, commander of the Armies of the North, General of the Felix Legions, loyal servant to the true emperor, Marcus Aurelius. Father to a murdered son, husband to a murdered wife. And I will have my vengeance, in this life or the next.

Ditto

__________________
Health is the greatest gift, contentment the greatest wealth, faithfulness the best relationship.
Buddha

I believe the majority supernatural phenomenon can be explained by Nikola Tesla's laws and theories, the rest by hallucinogenic drugs.


nebbit, I demand you put your last avatar up!

There are a lot of con artists out there that promote the belief of the supernatural or life on "the other side", so it makes it hard for me to 100% totally believe in these things. Then there are also people who come up with these claims that they've experienced something, and I'll listen to what they have to say, but if it's too crazy, I probably won't believe it (ex. ghosts blowing up a house, someone becoming possessed, anything that reminds me of Beetlejuice).

There was a girl that I met last year and haven't seen her since, but she wanted me to attend a seance run by some woman at a psychic shop close to my old apartment. $20 to hear some crazy lady act all holier-than-thou, tell everyone that they were reincarnated gods, and listen as she channeled dolphin spirits. I'm serious... the woman channeled dolphin spirits. I told this girl friend of mine to stop wasting her money, that she was a fraud. She didn't believe me. I never went to one of these shows to turn myself into a believer, cause it wouldn't happen.

I'm very open to the possibility of being totally extinct upon my death. I do not want this to happen and I don't fear going to hell either if there is life after death. I think that life after death is possible and I have experienced a few things on my own that have made my belief in this a lot stronger, because if they didn't happen, I'd be a total atheist. I cannot rely on the stories of Jesus Christ to persuade me to have faith, although if he's real, I'd like to meet him. I voted maybe.

Up where

How Ironic the name is more than a statement!

__________________
one cannot live without the other...
Ive tried and realized, theres something about you, something about your ways.... mwah

define your version of "supernatural."

__________________
something witty goes here......

I'm assuming this was directed at Toosie... and for now, he's window dressing on the side of milk cartons... so until he decides to rear his horny head around here again, this might help...

__________________

I've watched too many epidodoes of X-Files to say no.

__________________

not much more to say than:
of course.

what's supernatural too is for native speakers to write "perceive" with */-ie-/ as in "believe"...

__________________
We're a generation of men raised by women. I'm wondering if another woman is really the answer we need.

Oh froggy, even I know the I before e, except after c rule.

Oh waiit, I was missspellingg things on purposeq to mess with the frqg.

__________________

No. I believe what we perceive as supernatural is just that...a perception. And interpretation. Phenomena that we experience may be external (lights, sounds, smells) or it may be internally generated (from the brain). We may interpret the phenomena as supernatural or natural that we can't fully explain.

That's what I believe the supernatural is... a natural occurrence that we can't explain. Sometimes we prefer a supernatural explanation over "I don't know what the hell that was."

And admittedly, the supernatural has more romanticism and mystery than a simple "I don't know."

So basically Twain, your theory is: we havent discovered it all, but its all there for the discovering?

Of course they are natural occurences. They occur in nature. But, again, clearly the "occurrences" are deviant from the normal plodding everyday occurrences of life. What are we saying - that these oddities can be explained away?

I refer to my original statement: define supernatural.

Supernatural being?
Supernatural occurrence?

All you seem to be saying is that everything is "natural," apropos, there is no "super" natural. Kind of puts the cart before the horse, yes? Very circular reasoning, seemably.

Some of the defs of natural are:

2. Forming an essential element, as arising from the basic structure of an individual: built-in, congenital, connatural, constitutional, elemental, inborn, inbred, indigenous, indwelling, ingrained, inherent, innate, intrinsic, native. See BE, NATIVE, START. 6. Produced by nature; not artificial or manmade: organic, unadulterated. Idioms: pure as the driven snow. See CULTURE. 7. Accurately representing what is depicted or described: lifelike, naturalistic, realistic, true, true-life, truthful. See REAL. 8. Of a plain and unsophisticated nature: artless, homely, homespun, rustic, unadorned, unpolished. See PLAIN. 9. In a primitive state; not domesticated or cultivated; produced by nature: native, rough, uncultivated, undomesticated, untamed, wild. See WILD.

Supernatural is:

1. Greatly exceeding or departing from the normal course of nature: preternatural, unnatural. See USUAL. 2. Of, coming from, or relating to forces or beings that exist outside the natural world: extramundane, extrasensory, metaphysical, miraculous, preternatural, superhuman, superphysical, supersensible, transcendental, unearthly. See SUPERNATURAL.

So to the point: I think the "everything is natural" argument/vantange point falls squarely within definition 1 of "supernatural," which leaves definition 2 open for argument.

All in fun/sportsmanship/quest for knowledge-understanding!

vir loquitur qui omnium sapit!

Eh? So, ultimately, you've just said that the 'supernatural' covers everything, so the only thing left to debate is the 'natural'?

Commendable conclusion, but i'm not quite sure how you got there

If i invent the concept of "Ultra-natural" (defined as: 'Of, coming from, or relating to forces or beings that exist outside the supernatural world') - will the term supernatural become open for argument then?

Let's just debate the nature of the term 'supernatural' anyway. IE why do the phenomenon it describes have to be distinct from the 'natural universe'? We don't know the boundaries or composition of the universe anyway, so what's the point in drawing a realm that's distinct from it? Aren't there enough mysteries already? Why not merge the two concepts? God, meet Universe. Ghosts, meet Dark Matter. Telepathy, have you spoken to Schrodinger's Cat recently?

I wouldn't mind the supernatural concept at all, as it's used, except that sometimes strong believers in the 'other' can stop believing in the magic of what little we know about ourselves and the universe.

In Egyptian times the magnetic techniques used to heal were considered magic. Now, they're starting to be used in hospitals around the world (it can take a while to break down that 'worldly'/spiritual divide can't it ). To some people that takes the magic away, seeing them used in hospitals in that way.

There's nothing wrong with being beguiled by the mysteries of the unknown. I just don't see why they can't be considered a potential food source for the known. And one that's as infinite as our ability to digest it is finite . There'll always be more.

Yum

i see a talkative monkey man?

__________________
Virtual Reality chatter on a movie site? Got endless amounts of it here. Reviews over here

i just want to add to this, even though it probably won't really mean anything to anyone except for myself, but my mother has the sharpest...i don't know? radar? intuition? than anyone i've ever known. so many times upon meeting someone for the first time she will make little comments to me about them, things she suspects and I'll look at her and go, "what? you're crazy!" and more often than not, she was right on the button...

it's things like this that really makes me agree with what has been said here...though i am really not sure if i believe in anything supernatural...

__________________
letterboxd

great post Golgot! this frog totally agrees

hei! with that kind of intuition you have for translating, poor translators like myself could become obsolete and lose their job!