Supernatural

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
For other uses, see Supernatural (disambiguation).
Look up Supernatural in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

The supernatural (Latin: super- "above" + nature) refers to entities, forces or phenomena which are not subject to natural laws, and therefore beyond verifiable measurement. Though supernatural refers chiefly to the cause of phenomena (an interpretation), if a phenomenon can be scientifically demonstrated, it is typically no longer considered to be supernatural. Because phenomena must be subject to verifiable measurement and peer review to contribute to scientific theories, science cannot approach the supernatural; see scientific method.

"Measure what is measurable, and make measurable what is not so." --Galileo

Concepts in the supernatural domain are closely related to concepts in religious spirituality and metaphysics or spiritualism. The term "supernatural" is often used interchangeably with paranormal or preternatural — the latter typically limited to an adjective for describing abilities which appear to exceed possible bounds.

Supernatural claims assert phenomena beyond the realm of current scientific understanding, and may likewise be in direct conflict with scientific concepts of possibility, plausibility, or reality in general. The supernatural concept is generally identified with religion or other non-scientific belief systems — though there is much debate as to whether a supernatural aspect is necessary for religion, or that religion is necessary for holding a concept of the supernatural; see the nature of God in Western theology, anthropology of religion, and Biblical cosmology.

Contents

[edit] Views on the supernatural as...

[edit] ...distinct from nature

This, the most common view, the term supernatural is contrasted with the term natural, which presumes that some events occur according to natural laws, and others occur according wiki to a separate set of principles external to nature. For example God (in most definitions) is considered to be the ultimate creator of the universe and the natural laws, and not therefore part of the universe and bound by them. Those who believe in Angels and Spirits generally assert that they are super-natural entities. Some believe in forces beyond what is commonly considered natural while others believe all forces can be described as natural. Some religious people also believe that all things which humans see as natural, only act the same way consistently because God wills it so, and that natural laws are only an extension of divine will.

[edit] ...manifested through nature

Another view asserts that God makes himself known through the beauty and order of nature, but is not a personal God concerned with human moral activity, and does not violate the laws of nature which he created.

[edit] ...a higher nature

Others assert that events that appear to us to be supernatural occur according to natural laws which we do not yet understand. In contrast to supernaturalists, they assert that all things operate according to a law of nature. They assert that God, miracles, or other supernatural phenomena are real, verifiable, and part of the laws of nature that we do not yet understand. See Protoscience.

[edit] ...a human coping mechanism

Others, particularly among the skeptical academic community, believe that all events have natural and only natural causes. They believe that human beings ascribe supernatural attributes to purely natural events (eg. Lightning, Rainbow, Flood, Origin of Life) in an attempt to cope with fear and ignorance. Sometimes this belief overlaps with that of the supernatural being of a higher nature.

[edit] ...magic

Since the belief in magic is very old and held a great power over the minds and imagination of earlier generations long before the concept of experimental science, some historians of magic think belief in the supernatural is a surviving form of magical thinking. In the human quest for understanding and survival, magic may be seen as a complement to science. Both science and magic stem from the human imagination, observation and contemplation; but, whereas science requires time, resources, curiosity and flexibility, magic provides an immediate solution, more appealing to many, and requiring no further effort. There have been many ways in which people have sought to use both magic and science in hopes of empowering humanity for an improvement and longevity of life and to achieve a clearer picture of humanity's place in the cosmos. In the earliest Christian art (from the 3rd century) Jesus Christ is portrayed as a bare-faced youth holding a wand as a symbol of power,[1][2] as well as the more familiar figure who is bearded and robed, which became dominant with the development of Christian theology as the centuries passed. (See: Images of Jesus) Today it is desirable to many people to have even claims of the supernatural "proved by science". (See Lynn Thorndike's classic study,The History of Magic and Experimental Science, Tarbell Course in Magic, vol 1- Harlan Tarbell, forward and epilogue to Greater Magic- John Northern Hilliard, The Discoverie of Witchcraft- Reginald Scot and the vanishing works of Henry Ridgely Evans, The Old and New Magic, The Spirit World Unmasked, and Hours with Ghosts or 19th Century Witchcraft.) There may be a persistent link between supernaturalism, the paranormal, and the desire for immortality[3][4]

[edit] ...a word for unexplained events

The word "supernatural" is defined as something that is above or beyond what is natural; unexplainable by natural law or phenomena; abnormal. In other words, it is an occurrence that doesn't fit in with current scientific laws. For example, if someone were to jump up and continue to fly out of Earth's atmosphere, they would be breaking the law of gravity. This is considered "super"natural, because it goes against the human knowledge of natural law. However, if it happened, there would initially be an unknown reason for it, and were the reason discovered, it would no longer be supernatural. "Supernatural" (along with an accompanying assortment of words) in this sense is a word which could be used to describe everything we don't know yet. Before the scientific method was used, everything was believed to have a supernatural cause. For example, in ancient times, life's processes seemed to be supernatural. Now science can explain most of life's processes using information obtained through scientific observation and analysis. "Supernatural" today is in this sense merely used as an inspiration for more scientific knowledge tomorrow.

[edit] Arguments in favor of a supernatural reality

Following are some common arguments in support of belief in supernatural phenomena.

  • Many proponents believe that the complexities and mysteries of the universe cannot be explained by naturalistic explanations alone and argue that it is reasonable to assume that a nonnatural entity or entities resolve the unexplained. Proponents believe that it is unlikely that all observable phenomena can be satisfactorily explained without invoking a cause outside of nature. Believers claim that, overall, a theistic worldview is "superior" to an atheistic worldview, and in a theistic worldview some actions of God will be supernatural.
  • A few proponents also argue that just as science has evolved from primitive early attempts to explain natural events (such as spontaneous generation and the doctrine of humors) into a much more accurate discipline, religion has evolved from early attempts to explain supernatural events (such as animism) into the hypothetically more credible modern religions. Therefore, just as the simplistic and erroneous scientific explanations of early humans should not discredit modern science, the relatively simplistic religious concepts of early humans should not discredit modern religion. However, this analogy is not precise, since science is based on the continual gathering, testing and refining of information, while religion is based on belief. There are still practitioners of many "primitive" religions today. Most "modern" religions are also based on writings and concepts which are thousands of years old.
  • Proponents note that many of history's greatest scientists, including Galileo, Copernicus, Newton, Faraday, Mendel and Maxwell appear to have believed firmly in a supernatural God. However it is also acknowledged that, because freedom of speech on religious matters is a relatively recent development, it would have been almost impossible for scientists earlier than Newton to publicly doubt the existence of a deity, let alone to openly avow agnosticism or atheism. It would also be quite difficult for such individuals to simply put aside the childhood conditioning of growing up in in a highly religious culture.
  • Proponents claim that while some people have invented religions to help them cope with frightening and unexplainable phenomena, others have come to believe in supernatural phenomena through intellectually honest means, having been persuaded by reason, evidence, and experience that the universe cannot be explained by naturalistic explanations alone, but is best understood by invoking the supernatural[citation needed].
  • By its own definition, science is incapable of examining or testing for the existence of things which are untestable. Science concerns itself with what can be measured and seen through observation, logic, and scientific reason. Proponents of supernatural phenomenon hold that scientific methods would not detect them; therefore the lack of evidence does not matter. Scientists counter that if this is so, then proponents of supernaturalism themselves would be incapable of witnessing any supernatural phenomenon, as human senses themselves operate within the laws of physics and can only sense events occurring in the natural, physical world.
  • Some of modern biblical scholarship is based on the presumption that the supernatural does not exist, or that God is far less involved in the world (deism) than supposed by individuals who believe in divine intervention. Many theists believe that this biases the results[citation needed], and is of itself equivalent to a religious position.

However, Jews do not accept the claims made in the Christian New Testament; similarly, Christians do not accept the supernatural claims made by the Qur'an, the sacred book of Islam, and so on. John Drane writes:

Not unrelated to this is a more general philosophical skepticism towards any document whether ancient or modern, that appears to give credence to the possibility of the occurrence of unique, or apparently miraculous happenings. Academic biblical study still generally operates within a mechanistic world-view, according to which the universe is understood as a closed system, operating according to rigidly structured 'laws of nature' which are entirely predictable and never deviate. By definition, therefore, the unpredictable cannot happen, and on this view it is inevitable that the gospels should be seen as something other than history, for they do contain accounts of a number of unique happenings which appear to violate the 'laws of nature' as set out by Newtonian science. Physics, of course, no longer operates on that paradigm, and the work of more recent theorists has led to the emergence of a far more flexible understanding of what might be possible within the physical universe.
  • Proponents of supernaturalism claim that their belief system is more flexible, which allows them more diversity in terms of epistemology (ways of understanding knowledge). For example, scientists accept the findings that the Earth and universe are many billions of years old. Among members of the Christian, Jewish and Muslim communities, however, there is a wider range of beliefs that are based on claims of divine revelation as opposed to verifiable facts. Some have a literal interpretation of Genesis, and they believe that the earth and universe are only 6000 years old in contradiction to all verifiable evidence; other Christians accept the results of science which show the Earth and universe as many billions of years old in terms of age.
  • Many religious people fear science and claim that supernatural phenomena, being essentially "unnatural," are not appropriate for scientific study (see also William James, The Variety of Religious Experience). James was convinced Leonora Piper was an authentic spirit medium who contacted the dead. See: Studies in Spiritism by Amy Tanner, Prometheus books, 1994, reprint of 1910 edition and Both Sides of the Veil by Anne Manning Robbins, Boston, Sherman, French & Co, 1909, and The Correspondence of William James #06 by Ignas K. Skrupskelis. A striking example that many times the quest for proof of the supernatural has led to a deterioration of rationality caused by a "need" to believe.
  • William Dembski writes:
"The problem with terms like "supernatural" and "supernaturalism" ... is that they tacitly presuppose that nature is the fundamental reality and that nature is far less problematic conceptually than anything outside or beyond nature. The "super" in "supernatural" thus has the effect of a negation.
But what if nature is itself a negation or reaction against something else? For the theist (though not for the panentheist of process theology), nature is not a self-subsisting entity but an entirely free act of God. Nature thus becomes a derivative aspect of ultimate reality—an aspect of God's creation, and not even the whole of God's creation at that (theists typically ascribe to God the creation of an invisible world that is inhabited among other things by angels). Hence, for the theist attempting to understand nature, God as creator is fundamental, the creation is derivative, and nature as the physical part of creation is still further downstream. [1]
  • C.S. Lewis argued in his book, Miracles, that it is inaccurate to define a miracle as breaking the laws of nature. Instead,
"The great complex event called Nature, and the new particular event introduced into it by the miracle, are related by their common origin in God, and doubtless, if we knew enough, most intricately related in his purpose and design, so that a Nature which had had a different history, and therefore been a different Nature, would have been invaded by different miracles or by none at all."
  • In connection with his writing about the appearance of Jesus Christ the Apostle Paul himself acknowledges that; "oppositions of science" will occur and so leaves a testimony in the Bible regarding a supernatural event to which many may struggle to attach a scientific explanation. This may also be viewed as a reference to Gnosticism, however, as the Greek word translated as science is γνωσις (gnosis).

[edit] Arguments against a supernatural reality

While the exact definition varies, any concept of supernaturality requires that supernatural phenomena are not subject to the natural laws accessible by the scientific method. However some thinkers suggest that, if a phenomenon is by definition outside of the realm of science, it therefore cannot be experienced and has by definition no impact on our lives.

  • Our knowledge of the world is continuously increasing. Some phenomena, once assumed supernatural, can today be explained by scientific theories, while others could be dismissed as erroneous. Volcanoes were once considered deities and natural calamities the actions of gods and people sacrificed animals or even other people to please their gods. If our current understanding is the gauge of supernaturality, its realm is ever decreasing and very subjective.
  • Science does not claim that phenomena contradicting our intuitive view of the world are impossible to occur. Scientists study such phenomena every day. In fact, some scientific theories, such as quantum mechanics, are much more counterintuitive than most supernatural concepts. But many claimed supernatural phenomena vanish when they are examined closely. There have been, for example, various studies on astrology, most of them with negative results (a single positive result cannot outweigh many negative ones, as it can be expected by mere chance).
  • Supernaturality may be a remnant of a static world view. It comes from a time when the growth of human knowledge was appreciably slower than at present. The Aristotelian Mechanics were considered valid for more than a thousand years. At that time, human knowledge may have seemed relatively static and anything exceeding it seemed to be from a different world. But even today some people try to describe the world with unchanging "laws of nature", declaring that anything beyond this framework is supernatural and inaccessible to human understanding.
  • If a bush suddenly burst out in flames, and the fire would not consume it, a scientist might not call it supernatural, nor deny that this is happening, but might curiously examine it. Pheonomena which may at first appear to be supernatural may well have a natural explanation, subject to scientific analysis. Immediately assuming a supernatural explanation could be a logical fallacy, or an example of junk science or pseudoscience.
  • One interesting argument against supernaturalism is based on its implicit dishonesty. The use of the term dishonesty is from the definition of honesty based on fairness in that unfair treatment in the consideration of various supernatural beliefs is not fair and thus not honest or it is dishonest[citation needed] . It is common knowledge[citation needed] that the majority of supernaturalists of any given religion only believe in a very narrow subset of all supernatural explanations of reality when all the supernatural beliefs of all religions, past and present, are taken together. For example it is very common knowledge that the vast majority of Christians today do not think that we are reincarnated, nor do the vast majority of today’s Hindus think that everyone permanently goes to heaven or hell when they die. In this day and age for many of them it is not that they are unaware of other supernatural explanations of existence (Hinduism vs. Christianity), but they have chosen for whatever reason to embrace a particular subset of all religious supernatural constructs and explanations[citation needed]. If a supernaturalist thinks that a particular subset of supernatural beliefs are the "Truth" because they were declared "Revelation" then all versions of the supernatural that are taught as "Revelation" are either equally true or untrue as a matter of fairness (honesty)[citation needed] . So it is dishonest (unfair) to accept the gospels as "Revelation" and thus the "Truth" but to reject the Vedas as “Truth” which are also claimed to be "Revelation". Either such claims are all equally acceptable or they are all equally unacceptable[citation needed]. But in this day and age it is common knowledge that the "Revelation" of Hindu dogma is not as equally acceptable to Christians as the "Revelation" of the Christian dogma and visa versa[citation needed].

[edit] Naturalization vs. supernaturalization

Some people believe that supernatural events occur, while others do not. In the process of debate, both sides frequently attempt to discredit the other. People who believe in supernatural events accuse those who do not of naturalizing genuinely supernatural events; people who do not believe in supernatural events accuse those who do of supernaturalizing genuinely natural events. The argument against the supernatural becomes inherently weak when a simple believer in the supernatural transforms into a living personal testimony to the supernatural upon witnessing something they truly know to be "supernatural". The inherent weakness of the "naturalizer" stems from the fact that to naturalize everything the witness to the supernatural ever claims as being supernatural is not in any way a discredit to the supernatural witness. It is more akin to simply shrugging the shoulders in disagreement. The genuine witness to the supernatural will make his case by the detail in which he describes his account of that which he truly knows to be supernatural. The naturalizer has the luxury of never having to make a case about anything, as to them, everything is naturally occurring[citation needed]. The rub of the situation becomes clear when we hear personal testimony of an account of an event which on its surface can only be classified as supernatural.

[edit] "Naturalization"

The neologism naturalize, meaning, "to make natural", is sometimes used to describe the perceived process of denying any supernatural significance to events which another presumes to be supernatural. This perceived process may also be referred to as reductionism or deconstructionism. It rests on the believer's presumption that supernatural events can and do occur; thus, their description as "natural" by the skeptic is seen as a result of a process of deliberate or unconscious denial of any supernatural significance, thus, "naturalization".

(This should not be confused with naturalization, the process of voluntarily acquiring citizenship at some time after birth.)

[edit] "Supernaturalization"

The neologism supernaturalize, meaning "to make supernatural", is sometimes used to describe the perceived process of ascribing supernatural causes to events which another presumes to be natural. This perceived process may also be referred to as mythification or spiritualization. It rests on the presumption of the skeptic that supernatural events cannot or are unlikely to occur; thus, their description by the believer as supernatural is seen as the result of a process of deliberate or unconscious mysticism, thus, "supernaturalization". Supernaturalization can also mean the process by which stories and historical accounts are altered to describe supernatural elements.

[edit] The subjective nature of the issue

An individual's interpretation of events depends upon his conscious or unconscious theories toward the nature of the universe. Since each brings a unique set of personal attributes to a situation, and each situation brings different forces to bear, two people may come to completely different conclusions based on identical evidence. Some have suggested that dogmatically held conclusions regarding the existence or nonexistence of the supernatural prevent one from maintaining an "open mind." Instead, such beliefs supply comfort and satisfy an individual's need for security. According to this argument, selectivity governs phenomenological reality, meaning that one "screens out" possible explanations simply because they conflict with one's paradigm and create dissonance. Conformity to the popular dead end conclusions of the existence or nonexistence of the supernatural hinders human creativity and progress, because it limits the scope of curiosity and other alternative explanations one is willing to consider. For example, to make oneself "look good" to others thus avoiding isolation, and perhaps the desire to imitate personal heroes. Generally we criticize and question the picture of reality held by others. It is rare to question one's own. Rarer still to admit our own is distorted.

[edit] Competing Explanations and Criteria of Preference

For other people it is not a matter of supernatural events vs. natural events. They are all events but there can be many competing explanations. The question then becomes what criteria shall one use to prefer one explanation over another. One must be careful not to confuse the phenomenon with the explanation. We may agree that a bush has burst into flames, where we may differ is in the explanation of that event. The supernaturalist in that instance prefers the supernatural explanation based on one or a number of criteria of preference. It could be because the explanation includes constructs such as an immortal soul and other purported phenomena such as it rising to a place of great joy upon being released at death and they find this very attractive. The naturalist may prefer the natural explanation because such explanations are required to have predictive power, and being able to predict in a reliable way what will happen when a certain set of circumstances is present is something they find attractive. There are many people that are comfortable with accepting both explanations to satisfy several preferences such as a supernatural explanation that provides comfort from the thought of death and the natural explanation because of its utility in being able to reliably control fire. A person may be a naturalist because they are driven by the preference of predictability rather than comfort whereas another person may be a supernaturalist because they prefer explanations that make them feel better about their eventual death rather than how useful they are on actual reality.

[edit] Alleged instances of supernaturalization

  • In the Hebrew Bible, plagues and other misfortunes are described as signs of God's anger or vengeance. J. Keir Howard of the Diocese of Wellington Institute of Theology, New Zealand, notes that:
Until there was any proper understanding of the causative factors in disease and the actual disease processes themselves, there was a tendency to see sickness as a result of divine visitations and punishment for wrongdoing. (Oxford Companion to the Bible (1992), entry for "Medicine and the Bible")

Believers respond to the many instances of supernaturalization by arguing that the fact that supernaturalization often occurs does not refute the existence of the supernatural any more than the fact that scientists often make errors refutes the existence of the natural universe; and that the supernatural by its very nature cannot be explored through science, and must therefore be explored through different means, such as spirituality. Nonbelievers counter that the two forms of explanation cannot be equated, because erroneous naturalistic claims, such as those made for the existence of phlogiston or N-rays, are routinely and often rapidly corrected by reference to nature, while erroneous supernaturalistic claims such as the above are impossible to correct by reference to supernature or by any other widely accepted objective means.

And then there are the practical considerations. Explanations based on supernatural constructs have consistently been found to be no better than no explanation at all at predicting outcomes before the fact. Simply on the basis of choosing which explanations work best at not only accounting for reality but predicting it before the fact, natural explanations are to be preferred.

[edit] Supernatural in Fiction

The supernatural is also a topic in various fictional genres, especially horror fiction and fantasy fiction.

[edit] See also

  • Dualism (Philosophy of mind) - the view that the mental and the physical have a fundamentally different nature as an answer to the mind-body problem.
  • Idealism (Philosophy) - any theory positing the primacy of spirit, mind, or language over matter. It includes claiming that thought has some crucial role in making the world the way it is.
  • Miracle
  • Vitalism - the doctrine that life cannot be explained solely by mechanism. Often, the nonmaterial element is referred to as the soul, the "vital spark," or a kind of spiritual energy.
  • God of the gaps - events originally ascribed to a supernatural cause move into the natural realm when explained by science.
  • ex nihilo

[edit] Compare with

  • Naturalism (Philosophy) - which rejects the validity of explanations or theories making use of entities inaccessible to natural science.
  • Materialism (Philosophy) - the view that the only thing that can truly be said to 'exist' is physical matter and energy; that fundamentally, all things are comprised of 'material'. Materialism is typically contrasted with dualism, idealism, and vitalism.
  • Scientific method - a meticulous means of building a supportable, evidenced understanding of our natural world. The ability to repeat an experiment and obtain the same observed results is held in high regard.

[edit] Quotations

[edit] References

  1. ^ The Two Faces of Jesus by Robin M. Jensen, Bible Review, 17.8, Oct 2002
  2. ^ Understanding Early Christian Art by Robin M. Jensen, Routledge, 2000
  3. ^ The Psychology of Conviction: A Study of Beliefs and Attitudes by Joseph Jastrow, Houghton Mifflin Co., 1918
  4. ^ Search for the Soul by Milbourne Christopher, Thomas Y. Crowell, Publishers, 1979
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../s/u/p/Supernatural.html"