Is magick and the supernatural just science we don't understand yet? Or is it just delusions and superstitions?

Is magick and the supernatural just science we don't understand yet? Or is it just delusions and superstitions?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=qn96ClzYP0U
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

an epistemology professor explained it perfectly, for something to be scientific it has to be reproducible, if it is not reproducible then it falls within the realm of faith or superstition
one would assume that only an almost infinitesimal number of superstitions are actually real, but there is no way to prove it one way or another

>for something to be scientific it has to be reproducible
Well I'm glad your professor thinks astronomy isn't scientific.

You need to kill yourself
You need to go to

>You need to kill yourself
Congratulations on not an argument.

How is astronomy not reproducible? It is true that getting the same measurements out of something in some sciences is pretty much impossible, but anyone with a semblance of common sense understands that we are talking about statistical reproducibility to dampen the errors.

If one astronomer records a certain radiation, another should reproduce the experiment recording statistically similar radiation. Compare it with superstition, if a medium claims that he can feel a ghost, the reproducibility implies that a scientist using the proper instruments should be able to record the same ghost. But it has never happened, therefore superstitions are not reproducible and not scientific.

Neither. It operates on a different level than science but is nevertheless real.

You guys need to look up the Duhem-Quine-Thesis.

Sure thing /x/.
Why are you idiots making so many threads lately?

You're right, astronomy may not have been the best choice.

Your philosophical argument in no way takes away the distinction between actual science and paranormal unscientific tricks for goys.

I'm not the same user, but I don't think he was arguing that this argument invalidates distinguishing science form pseudo-science. At least what I took him to say was that our criteria for what counts as scientific can't be reduced to reproducibility.

That may be true, but not being able to reproduce a finding should set your alarm bells ringing

The mindset changed with Newton.
He operated on the notion that the universe is governed by laws and that we were, in principle at least, able to figure them out.
If you don't believe that, you might as well give up now.

I read an article once about classes at a madrassa in Pakistan. 2 moles of hydrogen and a mole of oxygen combine to make water -- but only because of the personal intervention of Allah!
It's not like Christianity where the supposition is that God could flout the rules -- but chooses not to most of the time.
The Islamic belief is that active intervention is required at every instant.
THAT is what I'd call "supernatural" because we'd never be sure of anything, regardless of how many times we've done the experiment previously.

I go with Heinlein's "One man's magic is another man's engineering."

Definitely.

>only an almost infinitesimal number of superstitions are actually real

this is probably true, but at the same time only an infinitesimal portion of true things manifest themselves as experimentally reproducible results, so its sort of a double bind.

My suspicion is that magick, parapsychology and all other spooky specimens of deep metaphysics would reveal themselves to be boring, trivial statements about mere existence if a complete picture of consciousness and its relationship to the universe could be attained. To answer the OP though, I think such a picture can't be arrived at scientifically; and therefore can't ever exist, since no explanatory engine with a broader reach than science can ever be verifiable. Science is verifiable precisely because the scope of what it can say about the world is so tightly constrained. It is an interesting question though, and its possible if for instance we're in a simulation and the source code can be mined with a collider at the planck energy level or something. That sounds like sci-fi nonsense to me though.

>You guys need to look up the Duhem-Quine-Thesis.
too lazy, links?

try past life regression out and see for you self

youtube.com/watch?v=qn96ClzYP0U

nvm, thought it would be harder to find. though it seems to me mostly applicable to modern physics you know not being able to objectively test each part of a theory sometimes and all.

Yes. To both, Any and ALL.

How Do I Kill The Immortal Human Race/33/我如何殺死不朽的人類種族?

So, anyway... hello. Why are all the Immortal Time Travellers on Veeky Forums and not anywhere else? Is the only question I want an answer to.

Is Veeky Forums ? /b's/RandomNumberGenerator?

It is in the mind

BRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAPPPPPPPP in all fields

>only an infinitesimal portion of true things manifest themselves as experimentally reproducible results,
So this is your mind on /x/?