From: {$to$}@meden.demon.co.uk   
      
   On 08/09/2025 19:55, Mark Isaak wrote:   
   > On 9/6/25 7:23 AM, MarkE wrote:   
   >> [big snip]   
   >   
   >> What if science itself identifies non-causal phenomena? Now, if I   
   >> understand correctly, you are saying this can never happen; rather,   
   >> what may appear to be non-causal can only be categorised as "currently   
   >> unexplained naturally".   
   >>   
   >> This is the nub of the issue I think. You seem to have upfront   
   >> excluded epistemologies apart from science (as good as it is). This   
   >> provides a jusfication to leave it at "currently unexplained   
   >> naturally" rather than considering supernatural explanation, because   
   >> you assume that there is no other legitimate means of acquiring   
   >> knowledge, and the best we can do is park it in the science baskets of   
   >> "to do" or "too hard" (which takes us back to 1 above).   
   >   
   > Okay, for sake of argument, let us suppose you have identified something   
   > as non-causal, or even unambiguously supernatural.   
   >   
   > Then what?   
   >   
   >  From a scientific standpoint, you're at a dead end. The main strength   
   > of science is that it lets us make predictions, but you can't do that   
   > with supernatural. Science also typically opens up further areas for   
   > investigation, but here, instead, you're closing them.   
   >   
   > Theology isn't helped, either. "Supernatural" does not tell you anything   
   > about the supernatural "cause" either. (In fact, per our premise, there   
   > was no cause.) Even if you take a leap of faith and say "God did it,"   
   > you (or maybe everyone else besides you) are left with the question,   
   > which god?   
   >   
   > As far as I can see, there are two reasons why someone might want   
   > supernatural explanations. The first is that they might be popular for   
   > the same reason that postmodernism was popular: you get to make up   
   > bullshit, free from all constraints, that a few other people might even   
   > find impressive. The second is that hostile foreign powers might   
   > encourage it as a way to sabotage a nation's economy and power.   
   >   
      
   I believe that there is a third reason, as explicated in the Wedge   
   Document. They want to do more than just impress people with bullshit.   
      
   --   
   alias Ernest Major   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)