|
|
|
Which Witch Are You?
Hey there, Dorothy -- are you a Good Witch or a Bad Witch? Is your friend acting like a bitch? Answer these five questions from Samantha's Twisted Book of Shadows and find out which witch is which? 1. These days I ride: a) side-saddle b) a broom c)...
|
DESIRE & PURPOSE: The Keys to Unlocking Wealth & Abundance in
On February 5, 1999, in the beautiful paradise of Waikiki Beach, a young man by the name of Robert Edwards was living his dream. After a sensational rookie season in the National Football League, he was enjoying his week of fun and relaxation...
Epileptics are Special.
Have you been diagnosed as epileptic? Are you a family member,
or friend or partner of someone who has? Please be reassured.
There have always been people with epilepsy . Since the
dawn of time, epilepsy has affected millions of people,...
|
|
Welcome the Lessons
When we read of the great men of old, the mighty and the strong, the courageous, the faithful, those who slew thousands and ten thousands ... perhaps we also think of phrases like, "faster than a speeding bullet, more powerful than a locomotive,...
|
|
|
The Supernatural
Once we arrive at the conclusion that mere matter and natural
laws are not sufficient to explain the existence of the universe
and life, but a super intelligence is, then what? For some, this
begins a life of exploration. Others turn the matter over to
organized religions that claim to be a conduit to the creator.
For yet others, who assume supernatural is synonymous with
superstition, it means stopping before they begin.
The word supernatural is laden with emotion and confusion. It
connotes a surrealism, subjectivity and phantasm that makes it
easy to set aside, reject or use to justify an agenda. In
religions it circumscribes a sacred domain where profane and
mundane science cannot tread and where religious leaders can
claim special knowledge and exert power. Materialists use the
word to smugly describe the place where people go when they have
abandoned science and reason.
Here's the point I would like to make that will clear the air
for all sides and create common ground for progress: there is no
supernatural; there is only natural.
This is why I can say such a thing. To know what supernatural
is, natural must be defined. The prefix, "super," means beyond,
or exceeding. So we must know where "natural" ends before we can
know what is beyond it. The problem is, no one would (a better
word is should) be so silly or bold as to define the limits of
natural. That's because philosophic and religious ideas that
separate natural from supernatural have fallen one after another
to the revelations of scientific exploration. Lightning turned
out not to be arrows in the quivers of supernatural gods,
disease was not supernatural devil possession and the universe
was not a supernatural firmament circling the Earth.
In earlier times, the state was religion and the church defined
science. Ancient Egypt and Rome typified this. There was no real
separation of secular from religious. All was hunky dory. Then
along came the scientific revolution, beginning in the 17th
century, and science decided to depart from the fold. A truce
was made and a deal struck whereby the church could have the
supernatural, and science would take the natural. The fear of
being shot down yet again by science has created a mood of
capitulation by religions. They have surrendered even where they
need not have, such as with the issue of evolution.
In any case, this unwritten agreement about a division of
authority worked out pretty well until quantum physics showed
that there was no real divide between the physical and non
physical (the supernatural). Now we are once again at the point
where all knowledge properly belongs under one header:
reality-truth-nature.
This is an interesting state of affairs, not particularly
comfortable for either side. Religion sees its supernatural
being whittled away by advancing science; science sees its
materialism vaporizing into a quantum world that has flavors of
religion.
Exploration is the enemy of the supernatural. The more we learn,
the more natural there is and the less supernatural. That does
not bode well for the word. When a concept keeps caving in to
the pressure of advancing knowledge, it may be a good time to
retire it. If we do, a reason for much of the conflict between
science and religion will disappear.
Since truth is our objective, discarding a word should not be a
problem. That which is revealed from nature, natural things, is
just truth. There is neither super-truth nor super-nature. Truth
is truth. We may not have fully discovered all the truth nature
contains - and we certainly haven't - but that does not make the
yet unknown super-truth or supernatural.
All things of truth are natural, even that which we cannot see,
hear, feel, smell, touch or even conceptualize. Radio waves are
natural, X-rays are, as are microbes, molecules, atoms and
quanta, even though they are invisible, unknown to our naked
senses and fundamentally inconceivable. There are infinite
unknowns beyond our perception and even our technology. Is it
all supernatural or is it just nature yet undiscovered or poorly
understood? That's rhetorical. Is it not the height of
egocentricity and an outrageous curiosity of humans that we
would define the world as divided into natural and supernatural
based upon what we humans have or have not discovered or
understand?
Extraordinary, miraculous and paranormal events are actually
only glimpses of reality beyond normal human bounds, not
aberrations beyond nature. They are just preternatural, meaning
outside the normal course of nature, unusual, not supernatural.
If a person can walk through a wall, materialize objects out of
thin air, see through matter, rise from the dead or predict the
future, that means they have a special ability to tap into a
part of natural reality that most people cannot, not that they
are supernatural.
To disprove events such as near-death and out-of-body
experiences, some skeptical investigators duplicate elements of
these experiences with drugs such as DMT and LSD and with
centrifugal g-force experiments. The assumption is that if
unusual
phenomena can be induced by a physical act, in other
words shown to be natural, that that diminishes their merit by
proving they are not supernatural. The logic of that escapes me.
The fact that physical natural factors can induce extraordinary
phenomena does not prove that such events cannot occur outside
of the laboratory in the private lives of individuals. It proves
that apparently "supernatural" events are natural. Exactly my
point: there is no dividing line between the two.
Weird extraordinary things are not that at all, in a more
expansive understanding of reality. The point needs to be
whether things are true, if they are facts and actually happen,
not whether we can classify them as supernatural or not.
So let's strike the word "supernatural" from vocabulary (put in
quotes henceforth) and from our logic. That way we will not be
surprised by discovery or disappointed that our special little
"supernatural" thing turned out to be natural.
Understanding that all is natural opens the mind, removes fear
and makes everything fair game for study and exploration. On the
other hand, the more "supernatural" we accede to, the more we
are helpless victims and supplicants. Religion - constructed
around the "supernatural" - can be an excuse to escape
responsibility for our own actions and put things in God's
"supernatural" court: "It was God's will," "God made me do it,"
"God is punishing me," "God is blessing me." How convenient for
those not wanting to take responsibility for their own actions.
Life is better lived as if an atheist (no irreverence or
disrespect intended): Don't blame God and don't expect God to
step in.
Those who claim special knowledge of the "supernatural" can
gather power to themselves to lord it over those who buy into
their claim of privilege. We mere natural creatures can only bow
to that which is beyond nature and to the agents who claim their
guesses about it are sureties. But how can any mere natural
creature speak with certainty about that which is
"supernatural," and therefore unreal?
Not only do some within religion take advantage of the
"supernatural," so too do materialists. The latter assume, with
no little bravado, that because the "supernatural" has had to
constantly retreat in the face of advancing science, that
eventually everything will be measured and tallied with their
machines. They see "supernatural" as an excuse for intellectual
laziness. To them the "supernatural" is either unreal,
fraudulent, or a part of nature waiting to be harnessed by
scientific instruments and nomenclature.
The failure of the "supernatural" in the past to stand up to
scientific scrutiny gives materialists an excuse to reject all
nonmaterial phenomena and assume that materialism is an accurate
explanation of all of reality...which it most certainly is not.
In other words, since science defeated the supernatural doctrine
that the Earth was the center of the universe, it is reasoned
that science will defeat any religious, spiritual or
metaphysical idea. To them no investigation is needed. Something
being "supernatural" is enough reason to reject it out of hand.
"Supernatural" becomes an easily defeated straw man.
By assuming that things beyond measuring are just religious
fantasy or psychic voodoo, materialists close off discovery and
condemn themselves to a narrowed and constricted viewpoint that
reveals only a smidgen of reality. On the other hand, by
attempting to strictly define the "supernatural" and then having
that definition constantly gnawed away by advancing science, the
religionist is faced with constant intellectual dilemmas.
However, if "supernatural" is stricken from vocabulary,
everything then becomes natural. The materialist cannot so
easily dismiss nonmaterial events no matter how weird they may
be; the religionist can welcome any discovery science has to
offer.
Omitting "supernatural" opens the whole panorama of reality for
exploration and discovery. The more we learn about nature, the
greater its girth. What lies out there yet to be discovered,
however, is natural even if we never discover it, are incapable
of doing so - or it has no corpus and is infinite, omniscient,
omnipresent and omnipotent.
In the end, the term "supernatural," (and remember it is only a
word) seems to only create utility for those who make
pretentious claims to know all about it, and to provide an
excuse for materialist's rejection of anything that falls under
its rubric. Demystifying reality by releasing it from the
artificial bonds of "supernatural" is the necessary beginning to
rational, scientific and spiritual (three words that should mean
the same thing) discovery.
About the author:
Dr. Wysong: A former veterinary clinician and surgeon, college
instructor, inventor of numerous medical, surgical, nutritional,
athletic and fitness products and devices, research director for
the company by his name and founder of the philanthropic Wysong
Institute. http://www.wysong.net.Also
check out http://www.cerealwysong.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
