I'm Not Okay (You Wear Me Out)

Response to Carrisa - full post here

I, too, thought about this in class. I think I referred to it with the made up word "antinaturalism." Belief in only supernaturalism is largely impractical. I think that all people believe in at least some aspects of the empirically observable universe. They believe in and use the doors that allow them to travel from room to room; they do not walk into walls and doors. They believe in height difference between ground level and the second story of a building; they do not break their feet from jumping/walking out the second floor.

Troll in the Dungeon, Werewolf on the Quad

Question 2: Does science ever make judgements about the possible existence of the supernatural?

Science by its nature must occasionally make judgments about the possible existence of a supernatural being. If for instance, a person were to say that there was a werewolf transforming on the quad right now for all to see with their naked eyes, science, as it is based off of empirical facts, would have to say that such a supernatural thing does not exist in that state. Additionally, science can say that the existence of werewolves in generally is not likely, as such a transformation would involve a physiology that no human could possess; transforming from a human to a werewolf and back would involve the growing, shrinking, and readjustment of bones, such that many of the human bones would break. Since no evidence of human transformation even to a far lesser extent has hitherto come to scientists, science would have to deny the possibility.

On the other hand, science cannot say anything about the supernatural that do not have empirically observable features. If a person where to say that there was a werewolf transforming on the quad right now, but that we could not observe it, science could neither confirm not reject that statement. All science can say is that there is nothing to be empirically observed. However, scientists may question how it is that a person claimed to know about the werewolf's transformation. Science is not right 100% of the time. Given that science is based on empirical facts, science is limited by our senses and our technology, which will improve, granted. But we may never get to a point where we have all possible means of empirically observing things.

Even if we do get to that point, how will we know?

Why the Sun Really Shines, Really This Time (We Know for Sure)

Question 1: Should we teach religions in school in the same manner that we teach science?

The answer to this question, I think, depends very highly on how schools teach science. In a very non-ideal setting science teachers teach scientific theories as though they are the only theories. In those same non-ideal situations science teachers teach science as though science is always 100% correct. Some science teachers in the sixties taught for a fact that the sun a sphere of gas. They used this song as a teaching aid:

This is a more fun cover version: 

Later, science advanced and scientists determined that the sun was not a mass of incandescent gas, but was rather a miasma of incandescent plasma. For fun here's another video:

Anyhow, back to serious philosophy. The point is that honest science teachers should teach science as it is: a tested hypothesis, which given the current data and observation, is the best explanation for the empirical facts. Religion, while based on faith rather than reason and direct observation, offers another explanation. 

I think that in honest academic settings it would be appropriate to teach science as an empirically observational based explanation of facts, and to offer a general religious studies courses as an option. It would be discriminatory and unfair to teach only one religion and it would largely impractical to teach all of the religions. So, perhaps it would be best to, beyond offering a few religious studies courses, provide resources through which students can learn more about various religions.

I'm not sure how practical that is, and I'm not sure where to draw the line.