Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr
From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Professor Wagstaff)
Newsgroups: net.religion,net.origins
Subject: Re: personality/consciousness, naturalism/materialism
Message-ID: <727@pyuxd.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 19-Mar-85 21:59:19 EST
Article-I.D.: pyuxd.727
Posted: Tue Mar 19 21:59:19 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 20-Mar-85 05:23:21 EST
References: <1027@decwrl.UUCP>, <678@pyuxd.UUCP> <5225@utzoo.UUCP>, <703@pyuxd.UUCP> <5263@utzoo.UUCP>
Organization: Huxley College
Lines: 27
Xref: watmath net.religion:6166 net.origins:889

> Suppose I got up one morning
> and, just of the wall, said that I believed in ghosts, and angels, and
> ESP, and UFOs and ETs on Alpha Centauri, and faith healing, and the
> real presence of Kali in my life. I may decide that they are natural
> but want to call them supernatural for some very pragmatic reasons. [LAURA]

It would explain a lot about our concurrent discussions, vis a vis wanting
to call things by certain names...  :-?

> For one thing, a lot of these things have been traditonally called
> ``the supernatural''.

Enlighten me please:  So?  Do you like the continuation of erroneously applied
words?  (I'm sorry, I know the answer to that question.  :-)

> ``Supernatural'' is also a convenient word to use when you do not really
> understand a lot about what is going on.

I would think, Laura, that when you don't really understand a lot about what is
going on, you would say "I don't really understand a lot about what is going
on" rather than looking for a "convenient" word.

> Are all of these reasons invalid?

I think so.
-- 
"It's a lot like life..."			 Rich Rosen  ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr