I state that there is no such thing as "supernatural".
now, this does not, in the way that I am saying it, mean that the things people call supernatural, do not exist. (well, some do not, but alot of it is real too)
how can I belive both of these things, it seems rather obviously contradictory?
well, this is an issue of defining "supernatural" the word itself would mean that its outside of the natural world. and this is inaccurate. or rather, it would be more accurate to say that the computer your using to read this, is more "supernatural" than say, ghosts.
how? if you were to accept that ghosts existed, would they not be a phenomena in the natural course of things?
computers sure aren't "natural" in that sense.
would it change anything, for those who don't "believe" in the "supernatural", if it was in fact, merely an extension of nature that is entirely beyond the current scope of science?
2007-12-01
23:14:14
·
11 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous