(June 2, 2016 at 5:38 am)Ignorant Wrote:(June 2, 2016 at 4:55 am)robvalue Wrote: If people want to say I can't prove there is no "supernatural" things, they are correct. Especially since I don't even understand what it's meant to be. I have no need or desire to, especially since that's a rigged scenario.
But that doesn't mean it does exist, or that it's reasonable to believe that it exists, whatever the fragging hell it is.
However; simply believing that there is stuff we have no idea about going on, that we may or may not learn about in the future, is perfectly reasonable in my opinion. There's no need to make it sound like magic.
Why does it have to sound magical?
If some thing (T) is acting/being in a way that does not derive from its nature (Nt), it must be acting/being according to some other thing (X) with a NATURE (Nx).
Thing (T) is therefore acting/being supernaturally (i.e. supernatural relative to T's nature (Nt)). But the action itself is only supernatural in relation to thing T, and not in itself (i.e. relative to Nx).
Relative to (Nx), it is not supernatural at all, but natural.
So it might be the case that X naturally causes T to act/be in a way that T is not able to act/be naturally (i.e. by its own nature).
What is magical about that?
I would just say anyone talking out his ass has said something shitty. In this case, I couldn't tell you what that was however.