Supernatural?

WillJ

WillJ

Coolness Connoisseur
Joined
Aug 9, 2002
Messages
9,471
Location
USA
Dictionary.com defines supernatural as "of or relating to existence outside the natural world," and for the sake of this thread, that is the one and only true definition; let's not bother debating it.

That said, what exactly does it mean when someone believes in something "supernatural"? What exactly is this "natural" world that something can be outside of*, and why isn't this supernatural thing considered part of the natural world? What's the justification for this perceived dichotomy?

Supernatural has just always been a funny word to me, and in this thread I'd like to make some sense out of it.

*If you'd like some assistance, dictionary.com defines nature as "the material world and its phenomena." If you agree with this, what does material mean? (You could look it up, but if you do so, you'll see that you'll need to define substance, and I think it's safe to conclude that you'll never get anywhere in this matter with just a dictionary.)
 
Could be the other 7 proclaimed dimensions. The natural world is what we perceive - as we are the ones who defined it. Something outside the 3 (4) dimensions we see would fit. I mean not everything sees things the same way. Some creatures can only see movement, some only black & white, some heat - maybe our vision, or senses at least, have a limit as well.

With that, look at how the super-natural has changed in time. I bet astronomy or space (universe) was considered super-natural at some point, but science has enlightened us there.

I think it's best viewed as the unknown, and indescribable. Maybe paranormal is a better word there...
 
sourboy said:
Could be the other 7 proclaimed dimensions. The natural world is what we perceive - as we are the ones who defined it. Something outside the 3 (4) dimensions we see would fit. I mean not everything sees things the same way. Some creatures can only see movement, some only black & white, some heat - maybe our vision, or senses at least, have a limit as well.
Click to expand...
Hmm, didn't think about that, but then again, I don't think that'd generally be considered supernatural. If it were, by the same reasoning wouldn't ultraviolet waves, for example, be supernatural?
 
WillJ, I think he's refering to something slightly different.

One book my High School Physics Teacher talked to the class about theorized about creatures in a 1 dimentional and 2 dimentional universe.

Asuume there was a 2 dimentional world which we could interact with, they would live in a plane and would not have any concept of "up and down." If we interacted with them, we could theotretically pickup "money from a bank" bring it outside their plane and replace it in front of a "2 dimentional creature" to enjoy. As far as the 2 dimentional creature would be concerned you would have made the money disappear and reappear in front of him. Thus, doing the impossible, since he has never experienced the third dimention. So as far as he would be concerned it would be evidence of the supernatural.

The Supernatural to us could very well be a simular thing, ie. God could be a 12th dimentional being able to interact with our "plane" of existance. Part of the points of the Bible is God is outside of time (ie. isn't constrained by our by the dimention of time as we are), thus it isn't too hard to imagine such a God could be a higher dimentional being... even if to some that may seem like lessening God's power or "righteousness".
 
Falcon02 said:
WillJ, I think he's refering to something slightly different.

One book my High School Physics Teacher talked to the class about theorized about creatures in a 1 dimentional and 2 dimentional universe.

Asuume there was a 2 dimentional world which we could interact with, they would live in a plane and would not have any concept of "up and down." If we interacted with them, we could theotretically pickup "money from a bank" bring it outside their plane and replace it in front of a "2 dimentional creature" to enjoy. As far as the 2 dimentional creature would be concerned you would have made the money disappear and reappear in front of him. Thus, doing the impossible, since he has never experienced the third dimention. So as far as he would be concerned it would be evidence of the supernatural.

The Supernatural to us could very well be a simular thing, ie. God could be a 12th dimentional being able to interact with our "plane" of existance. Part of the points of the Bible is God is outside of time (ie. isn't constrained by our by the dimention of time as we are), thus it isn't too hard to imagine such a God could be a higher dimentional being... even if to some that may seem like lessening God's power or "righteousness".
Click to expand...
Hmm, so would you say the natural world is the world we can perceive and understand, and the supernatural is outside of this?

That doesn't seem quite right to me, though. It's widely believed by physicists that there is more than one universe, but we cannot actually sense, much less interact with, other universes. Would these other universes be supernatural?
 
The extra dimensions invoked by String Theory, M-Theory, some versions of Supergravitation, etc are postulated to explain observed natural phenomena (such as the existence of matter and forces). Saying that they're "supernatural" does not seem any more sensible than saying that electromagnetic fields are supernatural.
 
Natural = everything surrounding us and obeying the laws of nature. We do not understand everything and will never be able to experience every aspect of nature, but that makes these things not supernatural.
Supernatural = not obeying laws of nature, not provable which means made up by human beings.
 
Mr. Blonde said:
Natural = everything surrounding us and obeying the laws of nature. We do not understand everything and will never be able to experience every aspect of nature, but that makes these things not supernatural.
Supernatural = not obeying laws of nature, not provable which means made up by human beings.
Click to expand...
If something doesn't obey the laws of nature, why doesn't that simply make the laws of nature incorrect?
 
The differentiation is actually quite simple, natural phenomena would be phenomena that has the potential to be explained by science (as it follows a set series of rules governing its behavior that humanity has the potential of understanding through the scientific method), supernatural would unexplainable.
 
But science is beginning to be able to detect and explain some of the supernatural, mostly through mathematics and physics. If we inhabit dimensions 1-4, the supernatural would be in dimensions 5-7, and 8-10. And perhaps more than what we can currently detect.
 
Quasar1011 said:
But science is beginning to be able to detect and explain some of the supernatural, mostly through mathematics and physics. If we inhabit dimensions 1-4, the supernatural would be in dimensions 5-7, and 8-10. And perhaps more than what we can currently detect.
Click to expand...
What?

First things first - we can't "detect" any dimensions beyond the usual 3+1. The extra dimensions we here about are theoretical constructs required by some models. They might really be there, or they might not, but in either case they are not, as yet, observed phenomena.

Secondly, it's entirely unclear what you mean by "supernatural" here. If the extra dimensions exist, they inextricably linked to the old ones - part of the same space-time continuum. Saying they're supernatural is like saying that east-west and north-south are natural, while up-down is supernatural.
 
Originally posted by WillJ
If something doesn't obey the laws of nature, why doesn't that simply make the laws of nature incorrect?
Click to expand...

I also stated that it can not be proven which leads to the conclusion supernatural = made up. With laws of nature I was not refering to the mathematical approximations we learn at science which are sometimes incorrect since they are only approximations. The moment something can be experienced it is part of nature and follows its laws.
Since supernatural phenomenons are outside of nature they can not be proven or experienced and are therefore wild assumptions of human beings.
 
The classification comes from people that claim that their assumptions exist somewhere, somehow but can not be proven. For me the word supernatural could be substituted with made up.
 
Let's see if this messes up anyone's mind ...

A suppose most of you would not object if I defined the "material world" as the universe made up of matter/energy. It follows then, from the definitions in the OP, that a supernatural object is an object that does not consist of matter/energy.

I also think that most would except that a concept such as "truth" is not made up of matter/energy.

Ergo, truth is supernatural.
 
To make it supernatural someone must claim it exists (outside of nature) and that it has some kind of relation with reality. Substitute Syldavia with heaven (or hell) and you see what I mean. I think the claim of influence on reality is essential to give the supernatural and its inventor/author some kind of importance.
 
Originally posted by The Last Conformist
You can't make sense of the concept of being supernatural, because the concept is inherently non-sensical.
Click to expand...

That´s pretty well my opinion. It is nothing than a word used to give thought up nonsense some kind of meaning.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Does Science Prove that Physicalism is True? No.
2 3
Replies
43
Views
3K
Valka D'Ur
Valka D'Ur
Z
Civlike game idea randomly ejected into cyberspace
Replies
10
Views
726
zuzim
Z
Bibor
The thing that irks me most about Sherlock Holmes screen adaptations
2
Replies
20
Views
2K
Plotinus
Plotinus
GoodEnoughForMe
Do you bike in the city?
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
bene_legionary
bene_legionary
Lazy sweeper
Star cities against city sprawl.. a thread about geometry...
Replies
0
Views
362
Lazy sweeper
Lazy sweeper
Back
Top Bottom