this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2023
118 points (93.4% liked)

Asklemmy

43744 readers
1103 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

OP said so.

OP called it a magical genie. Magic is by definition outside of nature.

If presented by observable evidence the supernatural exists in one specific case (the genie) then it is reasonable to suppose there may be other supernatural beings.

If this were a highly advanced alien with probability manipulating technology, that would be a different question.

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Magic is by definition outside of nature.

A magician would disagree with you :D

If this were a highly advanced alien with probability manipulating technology, that would be a different question.

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

If presented by observable evidence the supernatural exists in one specific case (the genie) then it is reasonable to suppose there may be other supernatural beings.

Imagine I was a person who had never seen a narwhal, and thus didn't believe they were real; suppose I believed them to be supernatural creatures. So to prove me wrong, you bring me to an aquarium and show me a narwhal and say, "look, a live narwhal. See? They are naturally occurring creatures". I could respond with, "well no, that's obviously a supernatural creature, and now it's reasonable for me to also suppose that unicorns exist!" Do you see any flaws in my logic?

We've hypothesized of a situation where we have an observable creature in front of us. At that point, regardless of how "magical" we believe it to be, it is, by the definition of "supernatural", not supernatural. However, when it comes to supernatural beings that we have not observed, this genie has not given us any more evidence for their existence.

Happy halloween!