Added: 5 months ago
From: berniebay
Views: 46
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (6)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Fits me better, as I do not accept naturalism, but I do not typically follow the typical version of 'supernaturalism.'

  • @KevZen2000

    I'm fine with methodological naturalism; working under the assumption that all phenomena are natural and can be investigated scientifically. Philosophical naturalism is a hard position to defend since it makes too many assumptions.

    Asupernaturalism would be similar to atheist in that it isn't any kind of positive claim. Rather, it's a rejection of a positive claim.

    I guess "skeptic" is probably the best word, now that I think of it.

  • @berniebay. Skeptic is a good word, but it alone does not hold enough power for this question. I accept methodological naturalism, but I deny philosophical naturalism, as believe in the possibility of immaterial entities,as but do not have any preconceived ideas of them,except for a generalization of such, as a Universal intelligence, but not a anthropocentric version of such, such as the Abrahamic faiths do with god, but god is something I remain atheistic about.

  • @KevZen2000

    I believe in the possibilities of everything, as someone who is open minded, I must. But, I don't actually believe that anything is immaterial since it hasn't been demonstrated to be true. Even if something is immaterial, if it exists, it is natural. If it affects reality, it can be tested.

  • =D! bobo the chicken is awesome!

  • I like asupernaturalist better, but it's kinda long

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more