In Other News: Pope is Catholic

[woodwardiocom]

Another way of reading today's XKCD is:

CLAIMS THAT SCIENCE WORKS:
Refuted by science, 0%
Confirmed by science, 100%

Not that this is tautological or anything.

Comments

[dariusk.livejournal.com]

That's what I was thinking. If something is confirmed by science, it's no longer supernatural.

[drwex]

I'm fairly sure I don't get the point you're making. Care to clarify?

[woodwardiocom.livejournal.com]

There are two parts to my point.

First, by definition, anything that has been confirmed by science is not supernatural. This makes the original comic tautological. It also means the original comic is ignoring the many cases where something was thought to be supernatural up until science explained it.

The second part of my point is much more arguable, and depends on the notion that science might not be the only valid way of determining truth. If this is the case, then there are going to be true things that appear untrue when tested using science. This makes the original cartoon about as deep as saying that the Republican Party is going to nominate a Republican as their candidate. Instead of leading to the conclusion, "Therefore supernatural stuff doesn't exist," it should properly be read as, "We have here defined the limits of what science can prove, but not necessarily the limits of what is true."

(Note that I don't know if there are other valid ways of determining truth besides science, but I believe that keeping an open mind requires me to recognize the possibility.)

[zonemind.livejournal.com]

I believe that keeping an open mind on this topic necessitates I listen to utter chumps try and tell me that the sky is green. But I'm no fan of science-ism, either, which is to say that there are plenty of chumps with white lab coats and a doctorate.

[drwex]

Thanks for explaining. I think the comic is narrower than your point, in that he refers to "supernatural powers" which I take to mean things like seeing ghosts, ESP, and other claims of personal magical abilities. These seem to be eminently testable phenomena, and much clearer than the general category.

I'm willing to admit of another method of determining truth but it needs to be something better than "I say so" for any number of people in the 'I'. To my knowledge, no proponent of supernatural phenomena has any candidate method that is any stronger.