(May 17, 2015 at 2:15 am)Nestor Wrote:(May 17, 2015 at 12:01 am)Randy Carson Wrote: One more question though: Are supernatural things possible?
What exactly is a "supernatural thing"? A thing that operates without causes and wherefore constraints? Sure, that may be possible, but why call it supernatural? Why not simply allow, if we absolutely must, that some natural events occur due to spontaneous generation? And even then, no justification could ever be given without appeal to rigid experimentation that has exhausted all other possibilities, which from our standpoint, in a serious attempt to acquire knowledge into the unknown, must always exclude supernatural as a most implausible explanation. Aside from Hume's devastating critique of miracles, which Pyrrho already mentioned, interpretation of ill-defined or misunderstood phenomenon should always be mindful of Lucretius' wisdom that "ignorance of their causes constrain men to submit things to the empire of the gods, and to give over to the gods the kingdom of the universe," which obviously prevents real insight where it may be within reach.
A thing which operates without causes may be possible.
That's a promising opening. It brings to mind the Kalam Cosmological Argument:
1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.
Now, I am no philosopher, but you can read more about that from an expert on that argument here:
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/in-defens...l-argument
Have you read any refutations of Hume? They are available and plentiful...
