Other Forms of Life (Evolution)

by dhw, Tuesday, December 16, 2008, 12:29 (5617 days ago) @ BBella

I pointed out that science can only deal with the natural world as we know it, and BBella thinks that most scientists "are correct in believing that everything has a natural explanation, even if they/we don't know what that explanation is." - Perhaps we need to distinguish between 'natural' and 'material', unless we're prepared to discount the possibility of a spiritual world (by saying categorically, for instance, that the brain and body are the source and not the vehicle of thought and identity). Otherwise, when we talk of the supernatural, it can be argued that we're only talking of natural phenomena we can't explain in terms of nature as we know it, and so if/when we get to know nature better, we will be able to explain them. This argument can be carried right through to God, who ... if he exists ... may be seen as synonymous with nature (pantheism). - The key expression, though, is "the natural world as we know it", and in its current state, science cannot provide material explanations for certain phenomena, which leads to scepticism. I'm talking about belief in UFOs, ghosts, ESP, near-death and out-of-body experiences, spiritualism, healing powers etc. They may all be part of nature; they may be delusions; they may be part of an immaterial universe beyond the scope of science. We just don't know, and until we have proof that is positive (or negative) enough to convince us as individuals, we should keep an open mind. That proof may come through experience (our own or other people's), or through science. By coincidence, an article in this week's Sunday Times magazine reports that there is to be a US and UK study of NDEs and OBEs, involving 25 hospitals and, eventually, 1500 survivors of cardiac arrests. No doubt the findings will remain open to interpretation, but at least such subjects are being taken seriously. I hope, BBella, you will find that as encouraging as I do.