RE: Scientific knowledge versus spiritual knowledge
January 28, 2016 at 7:46 pm
(This post was last modified: January 28, 2016 at 7:52 pm by Whateverist.)
(January 4, 2016 at 5:58 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote:(January 4, 2016 at 4:16 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: How do you distinguish between what you call a "spiritual" belief from the set of all possible beliefs?
You didn't answer the question. I think a true and justified belief should at least be demonstrable to others, or else how could you justify it to be true to anyone but yourself?
That is a good point. There are private truths, like my favorite flavor/color/author/etc, and then there is what we at least assume is mutually verifiable. As someone who isn't sure what meaning to attach to the term "god," it often feels as though whatever it may be surely belongs in the private domain. It isn't at all clear to me that god claims are empirical in nature.
Often those who make public god claims posit a third realm between what is private and what is empirical, called 'the supernatural'. Unfortunately that term is also one to which I am unable to attach any meaning. As far as I can tell, there is no such realm. There is simply what is in the world and what is in my experience. In some sense what is in my experience is also part of what is in the wider world. But it is because of the limited access to my experience that the division exists. Why should the supernatural division exist?
