Griggsy

Originally posted by Griggsy

[Empiricism requires us to eschew all revelations, religious experience,folk psychology, religius traditions and unfounded intuitions.
Successful theories have scope as they explain many facts whilst divine theories explain nothing. The former are simple whilst supernatural ones require convoluted, ad hoc asumptions without any supporting evidence as the emirical argument notes, and violate the Razor. Either we can verify that the supernatural makes for no miracles, miraculous births and no resurrections or they are nebulous. Theories must cohere with our conservation [ background] of kowledge , so as the supernatural cannot do that, it lacks that quiality. The supernatural either is worthless as the god of the gaps argument notes as explaining facts but also as explainiing theories themselves: such as the cosmolligical arguments.

And so one should be a skeptic about any supernatural claim. In fact, they are as worthless as perpetual motion machines! And theologians rank with parapshychologists whilst they can be more elaborate, they nevertheless add no knowledge.
John Haught belies his fellow theologian Alister Earl McGrath in maintaining that yes,people can use faith for all sorts of ideas, so one has to adduce reality independent of faith to support the supernatural.
Yet he himself excoriates us naturalsits for not following other venues than the empirical but he thereby begs the question. And what he himself adduces as those venues are nothing.
[COLOR=" These blogs further my analysis of the supernatural :
Carneades .Aimoo.com,
Thales. Blogger.com,
Thales IgnosticMorgan
Stato of Ga. WordPress.com,
Ignosticmorgan's blog ditto
Skeptic Griggsy ditto
Carneades Thales Strato of Ga. Atehist Bloggers and
Anaximander of the Emprie State of the South ditto
[/I][/COLOR].
I invite Zorasthruster and other naturalists to be moderators and all serious inquirers to post there.