3 ms·
Have you considered that you're interpreting it wrong? Go back in time with self-replicating, able to construct themselves to predefined structures, nanobots an
by jack_pp 4y ago
Have you considered that you're interpreting it wrong? Go back in time with self-replicating, able to construct themselves to predefined structures, nanobots and you'll have supernatural powers that "violate" scientific understanding of the time. Doesn't mean it can't be explained.
It is true hubris and actually kind of sad to think we know all laws of nature and nothing new could stump us and our cherished laws of nature.
Also, read my other comments. Science is about explaining the previously unexplainable. So nothing, no phenomena you sense with your senses, is beyond science.
- naasking 4y agoThe definition of "supernatural" has nothing to do with scientific understanding at any particular time, it's about whether a scientific understanding is possible even in principle. Deities and souls are not amenable to scientific understanding even in principle, that's why they're considered supernatural. Observed phenomena that defy current understanding don't qualify.
- epgui 4y agoLet's look at the root word. "Natural" does not mean "familiar" or "understood". It just means that it's a part of the physical world we inhabit. Conversely, the "supernatural" is what exists beyond the physical world we inhabit: it's not real by definition. This is all a semantic disagreement and not a question of hubris or overconfidence or of how advanced our knowledge really is.