RE: Supernatural isn't a useful concept
November 3, 2016 at 3:13 pm
(This post was last modified: November 3, 2016 at 3:15 pm by Gemini.)
(November 3, 2016 at 2:00 pm)Rhizomorph13 Wrote: You see how I defined it though and I think that, as a philosophical concept, natural pertains to things that exist so even if we don't understand something or we get the math wrong, we can say that any thing is natural that exists without too much trouble. No need for a set of things that are supernatural just because we don't understand them yet. Who would control that line in any meaningful way? We fly through the air in giant metal tubes! How is that "Natural"? Would you consider it supernatural? I wouldn't.
Sure, given how you defined it, it's useless. I suppose I'm audacious enough to redefine useless words to suit my purposes. Seems like a waste of a good listeme to do otherwise.
A Gemma is forever.