Science or the Supernatural?

[RaptorWizard]

Even if they both may be true on various levels, which of the 2 categories interests you more, or would you more likely build upon: Science or the Supernatural?

 

[Lark]

I dont think its either-or.

There's a lot of things which are supernatural until they are investigated and understood, then they are science.

Although it used to be more interestingly or excitingly linked, the earliest scientists or researchers were like magicians or at least sages and mages.

 

[Eye of the Potato]

I agree. Jungs work would have been based on the supernatural and is still seen as a pseudoscience, but once neuroscientists start looking at different types' brains patterns, it will become science. Just did a google search. They already did. lol.

 

[WALMART]

I agree. Jungs work would have been based on the supernatural and is still seen as a pseudoscience, but once neuroscientists start looking at different types brain patterns it will become science. Just did a google search. They already did. lol.

I do not understand how observing causation in the psyche is supernatural.

I think the supernatural is of most minor importance, for if it is supernatural, there is no way to probe its innards. A true logical fallacy, that term.

 

[Eye of the Potato]

I do not understand how observing causation in the psyche is supernatural.

I think the supernatural is of most minor importance, for if it is supernatural, there is no way to probe its innards. A true logical fallacy, that term.

Well look at how Jung approached the psyche and look at how Freud saw it. One looked to esoteric writings, the other was locked into a materialistic view.

I think what we call supernatural is really us misunderstanding how energy works. People who understand how energy works can look like magicians to those who don't.

 

[WALMART]

Well look at how Jung approached the psyche and look at how Freud saw it. One looked to esoteric writings, the other was locked into a materialistic view.

The material cannot be esoteric (particularly considering our age's advanced scope of understanding?)

I do think Jung has an affinity for metaphysical types, that is quite clear. But it is more for concern of their being bulldozed by the modern age, so far as I can tell.

I think what we call supernatural is really us misunderstanding how energy works. People who understand how energy works can look like magicians to those who don't.

I believe there are facets to perception we have not yet fully revealed, yes. But they are still an extension of sense, not the metaphysical.

 

[Eye of the Potato]

It doesn't matter.

 

[Eye of the Potato]

Actually matter and energy are the same thing. So the material can be esoteric. And the point I was making was that what we think is supernatural, what we label to be supernatural to be more precise, is just energy manifesting in ways we don't understand.

 

[RaptorWizard]

Actually matter and energy are the same thing. So the material can be esoteric. And the point I was making was that what we think is supernatural, what we label to be supernatural to be more precise, is just energy manifesting in ways we don't understand.

“The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade than in all the previous centuries of its existence.” ― Nikola Tesla

Indeed, I agree with both of you - new realities will explode forth with our greatest imaginings as we extend our perceptions forever into the future!

 

[Eye of the Potato]

“The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade than in all the previous centuries of its existence.” ― Nikola Tesla

Indeed, I agree with both of you - new realities will explode forth with our greatest imaginings as we extend our perceptions forever into the future!

Thank you.

 

[/DG/]

I do not believe in the supernatural.

 

[Avalon]

I'd rather be a God than a scientist, so I'd have to go with supernatural

 

[INTP]

The supernatural (Medieval Latin: supernātūrālis: supra "above" + naturalis "nature", first used: 1520–30 AD)[1][2] is that which is not subject to the laws of physics, or more figuratively, that which is said to exist above and beyond nature.

Everything obeys the laws of physics(and whether or not we know all laws of physics doesent matter), also nothing is above or beyond natural(again whether or not we know that something is natural doesent matter). Therefore, there is no supernatural. Its just a word which basically means untrue..

 

[RaptorWizard]

I'd rather be a God than a scientist, so I'd have to go with supernatural

Yes well, science works by rational means which follow from each other in causal chains.

The supernatural however is more like alterations of the currents, focusing the flow.

Perhaps the concept of contingency, the binder between the 2 may be a good bridge to walk, of both determined sequences and willed transformations.

 

[Avalon]

Yes well, science works by rational means which follow from each other in causal chains.

The supernatural however is more like alterations of the currents, focusing the flow.

Perhaps the concept of contingency, the binder between the 2 may be a good bridge to walk, of both determined sequences and willed transformations.

Assiah is the lowest emanation of the Godhead, this world and human science is incomplete and it will remain in this deplorable state, then again both originated from the cosmic source code, so I guest they are intrinsically linked...