3 ms·

> A genuine mystic revelation would mean, in my opinion, something that cannot be explained by the laws of physics Exactly this can happen, whilst also being l

> A genuine mystic revelation would mean, in my opinion, something that cannot be explained by the laws of physics Exactly this can happen, whilst also being labelled schizophrenia.

pingou 2mo ago
Yes but it would mean that the following two are both right, if there really is no difference between a genuine mystic revelation and schizophrenia: - There exists something that cannot be explained by the law of physics - a schizophrenia label is always caused by genuine mystic revelation I wasn't under the impression that the quote meant that a genuine mystic revelation would be labelled as schizophrenia, if that was what the quote meant, that doesn't seem like a great hindsight or particularly deep observation to me.
nathan_compton 2mo ago
Give me an example.
- swat535 2mo ago
  It's not possible, everything can be explained by science sooner or later. We have plenty examples of this throughout history: lunar eclipse as "omens", plague as "divine wrath", rainbow as a "sign of flood", etc. “What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." - Christopher Hitchens
  - nathan_compton 2mo ago
    "It's not possible, everything can be explained by science sooner or later." I'm not sure there is a good philosophical reason to believe this. I think something like it is certainly true, but its not entirely clear what an explanation even means, for one thing. And then there is the possibility that certain physical outcomes do not actually supervene upon the physical systems which constitute them. I do not believe in mystical experiences as being informative about the true nature of the universe, and I generally think "science" is a useful set of tools for (at least) predicting the future and designing machines and perhaps even for constructing ontologies, but I don't think "everything" can be explained by science. I can see no powerful reason to think everything has an explanation.

> A genuine mystic revelation would mean, in my opinion, something that cannot be explained by the laws of physics Exactly this can happen, whilst also being labelled schizophrenia.

pingou 2mo ago

Yes but it would mean that the following two are both right, if there really is no difference between a genuine mystic revelation and schizophrenia: - There exists something that cannot be explained by the law of physics - a schizophrenia label is always caused by genuine mystic revelation I wasn't under the impression that the quote meant that a genuine mystic revelation would be labelled as schizophrenia, if that was what the quote meant, that doesn't seem like a great hindsight or particularly deep observation to me.

nathan_compton 2mo ago

Give me an example.

swat535 2mo ago
It's not possible, everything can be explained by science sooner or later. We have plenty examples of this throughout history: lunar eclipse as "omens", plague as "divine wrath", rainbow as a "sign of flood", etc. “What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." - Christopher Hitchens
- nathan_compton 2mo ago
  "It's not possible, everything can be explained by science sooner or later." I'm not sure there is a good philosophical reason to believe this. I think something like it is certainly true, but its not entirely clear what an explanation even means, for one thing. And then there is the possibility that certain physical outcomes do not actually supervene upon the physical systems which constitute them. I do not believe in mystical experiences as being informative about the true nature of the universe, and I generally think "science" is a useful set of tools for (at least) predicting the future and designing machines and perhaps even for constructing ontologies, but I don't think "everything" can be explained by science. I can see no powerful reason to think everything has an explanation.