Unnatural?

[ThinkAboutThis]

I've always been leery of referring to something as 'unnatural'. Is there even such a thing? And if so, at which point would something become unnatural?

Jimmy: "You shouldn't smoke, it's not natural".
Roger: "I'm a part of nature, therefore everything I do is inescapably natural".

Nathan: "You shouldn't eat conventional fruits & vegetables, it's not natural".
Roger: "I'm a part of nature, therefore everything I do is inescapably natural".

I guess the words use could be pragmatic, however, the use of a word does not necessarily prove its existence.

[brimstoneSalad]

You're right; the word and concept of "natural" itself is ambiguous.

The only thing that's really unnatural is the "supernatural", which is supposed to be outside of nature/logic/any ability to reason or any adherence to natural rules or laws, which is often confused with the preternatural, which is just the unknown but that is still part of the natural world ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preternatural ); Wiccans typically believe in preternatural reality, for example, rather than a supernatural one, while Christians usually believe their deity is supernatural and is beyond the laws of nature and reason.

[ThinkAboutThis]

Do you think if the supernatural were to exist, and we discovered it, it'd therefore no longer be supernatural? Moreover, if the supernatural were to not exist at all, that would make the supernatural -- natural, since the concept would only exist within our minds, in the natural world.

[brimstoneSalad]

Do you think if the supernatural were to exist, and we discovered it, it'd therefore no longer be supernatural?

Well, the supernatural isn't just the unknown, it's the impossible -- something that violates logic and reason, and doesn't follow any rules -- so by definition it doesn't and can't exist.

The preturnatural may exist, and as we discover it, it will stop being preternatural and just be natural (because now the explanation is known). Like if ghosts were some kind of creature made out of dark energy, or some other silly science fictional explanation.

Moreover, if the supernatural were to not exist at all, that would make the supernatural -- natural, since the concept would only exist within our minds, in the natural world.

A concept and a thing are only the same thing when the thing is a concept. The supernatural is a classification of a group of actual material things or immaterial events that have an effect on reality; there are claims there which are empirical in nature.

The idea of the supernatural is distinct from the supernatural itself, since it doesn't claim just to be an idea.

[Red]

In a sense, nothing is "unnatural". Everything that isn't a part of nature (things created by sentient organisms) was made by using materials from nature. So in a sense.. maybe?

[ThinkAboutThis]

Well, the supernatural isn't just the unknown, it's the impossible -- something that violates logic and reason, and doesn't follow any rules -- so by definition it doesn't and can't exist.

Suppose that there's a supernatural entity that produced existence but opted to never meaningfully engage with it. It'd still be possible for this being to exist, but we would seemingly not have any way to interact with it, and we'd therefore never be able to know about its existence through scientific means. Along these lines, science couldn't distinguish between the presence of something or nothing beyond the spectrum of our own reality. However, if that supernatural being were to ever decide to interact with our reality, do you think it'd be possible to measure that interaction?

The preternatural may exist, and as we discover it, it will stop being preternatural and just be natural (because now the explanation is known).

Wouldn't the underlying truth of that situation (the preternatural just being natural), prove that the preternatural actually doesn't exist and was just created to compensate for our ignorance?

Similar to how the underlying truth was that the majority of slavery was morally wrong, however, it was blanketed by ignorance. It's not that those specific immoralities went from being morally right/neutral to morally wrong, but rather, they were always morally wrong and had the illusory blanket pulled away from them.

A concept and a thing are only the same thing when the thing is a concept. The supernatural is a classification of a group of actual material things or immaterial events that have an effect on reality; there are claims there which are empirical in nature.

The idea of the supernatural is distinct from the supernatural itself, since it doesn't claim just to be an idea.

True.

[brimstoneSalad]

Suppose that there's a supernatural entity that produced existence but opted to never meaningfully engage with it. It'd still be possible for this being to exist, but we would seemingly not have any way to interact with it, and we'd therefore never be able to know about its existence through scientific means.

See the principle of explosion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_explosion
The existence of any true contradiction (any true violation of logic) breaks reality.

So, it can not exist anywhere in contact with reality; it would negate the coherence of reality.

Along these lines, science couldn't distinguish between the presence of something or nothing beyond the spectrum of our own reality.

Sure, if it's outside reality, then it's not real.

However, if that supernatural being were to ever decide to interact with our reality, do you think it'd be possible to measure that interaction?

If something illogical interacted with our reality in any way, our reality would cease to be real.

Wouldn't the underlying truth of that situation (the preternatural just being natural), prove that the preternatural actually doesn't exist and was just created to compensate for our ignorance?

Preternatural is just ignorance, yes. It just means something that we can't explain as of yet, but that is part of nature.

[ThinkAboutThis]

The existence of any true contradiction (any true violation of logic) breaks reality.

So, it can not exist anywhere in contact with reality; it would negate the coherence of reality.

If something illogical interacted with our reality in any way, our reality would cease to be real.

In that case, why wouldn't it be possible for the supernatural being to become a natural part of our reality, and abide by the rules? So it's supernatural (unreal) up to the point where it shifts into our reality -- at which point it has become natural (real); thereby not causing our reality to become unreal since there's no longer a contradiction. ( )

Preternatural is just ignorance, yes. It just means something that we can't explain as of yet, but that is part of nature.

Ah. So the preternatural doesn't exist beyond our minds.

[brimstoneSalad]

In that case, why wouldn't it be possible for the supernatural being to become a natural part of our reality, and abide by the rules?

When you talk about a supernatural thing being at all, or doing anything, you're summoning up an inherent contradiction.

So it's supernatural (unreal) up to the point where it shifts into our reality -- at which point it has become natural (real); thereby not causing our reality to become unreal since there's no longer a contradiction. ( )

How can a thing that is not real do anything, or cause anything in reality?

You could certainly have a child and name it Micky Mouse, and assert that Micky Mouse the unreal fictional character shifted into our reality through that child, but it's meaningless, because the fictional character didn't do anything, you did: nothing was brought with it into this world, and all causal agents that actually created the child were within this reality. If you define "shifted" in such a meaningless way as that would qualify, then it becomes useless: this piece of toast is how the virgin Mary shifted into this world. This paperclip is how Godzilla shifted into this world. This piece of lint is how Popeye the sailor shifted into this world.
It's a meaningless assertion unless the non-existent fictional character actually has to have something meaningfully to do with it, in which case it's just impossible.

Ah. So the preternatural doesn't exist beyond our minds.

Correct. Preturnatural is basically a fancy way of saying "unexplained". Like the "U" in U.F.O. simply means that flying object is as of yet unidentified (as opposed to being positively identified as an alien spacecraft).