Evidence of Supernatural Ability

by GromitSK 74 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  GromitSK

  @Christ Alone - apologies I misunderstood the point you were making. I agree, if the evidence you have is enough proof for you that's your business.

  I don't think it helps when people mock others' positions but I think you'd agree it is legitimate to challenge statements people make about reality. For some the issue is closed and they just won't accept even the possibility of the opposing view. Others have an experience which is evidential enough to be proof for them, but it is subjective and hence isn't accessible to others. Maybe 'multiple dimensions' and your own 'spiritual' view is the same thing in different words? Maybe some find one description more palatable than the other?
• 

  Xanthippe

  I hope this isn't going to turn into another atheists versus believers thread - I might die of boredom. Your op is interesting Gromit. Someone said on here that evidence for the supernatural doesn't stand up under test conditions. Neither does string theory. There is absolutely no way to test or prove string theory - yet.

  Go out and meet the psychics and mediums, listen to what they say. They don't work in labs but what they say is fascinating. Test it for yourself, it is a personal scientific experiment. We don't have to make anyone else believe it- we're not in field service now.
• 

  cofty

  Test it for yourself, it is a personal scientific experiment.

  Personal anecdotes are not science.

  Susan Blackmore dedicated half her career trying to prove there was a scientific basis for the paranormal. She finally concluded there was none.
• 

  GromitSK

  That's true cofty but Sir Oliver Lodge reached the opposite view. I am not sure swapping names takes it forward.
• 

  Xanthippe

  Do you know why she did that cofty? Because when she was a student she had what she described as an out of body experience. It didn't fit with what she 'believed' as a rationalist so she spent her life trying to prove it was all in her mind. Her conclusions are up to her. They prove nothing to me.

  I am a little tired of people telling me what is reality. Been there done that etc etc.
• 

  GromitSK

  @xanthippe - maybe we need to get back to the original question: What would be supernatural and what would constitute evidence? I don't want to try police the thread, if it wanders off then maybe it needs to be left to die a natural death :)

  As for investigation by scientists, there has been plenty of it and many of them have been convinced of supernatural phenomena. I am not saying that means it's a fact merely that there is food for thought for those who are prepared to look at the research. Personally I am not sure i could ever be fully convinced without seeing it for myself no matter how elevated the authority was.
• 

  cofty

  she spent her life trying to prove it was all in her mind

  No she spent years trying to prove it was authentic and objective.

  Back to the topic....
• 

  Xanthippe

  Gromit, many studies have been done into the paranormal and consciousness - eg Charles Tart's experiments, if we must, as you say swop researchers' names.

  If you study a history of science course at university level you will find that much of what we call science was developed by amateurs, Darwin among them. Many amateur naturalists and geologists contributed to the theory of evolution in the nineteenth century.

  Hence my suggestion to get out there and find out for yourself. Over the centuries very few discoveries have been made by scientists in labs. That is a fallacy I'm afraid.

  I am totally on topic, I am just looking at the subject very broadly.
• 

  cofty

  I am totally on topic, I am just looking at the subject very broadly.

  I'm saving that line for future use.
• 

  Xanthippe

  You ignore the entire post and pick on that one line cofty. Why don't you discuss the rest of my post with me?