Why do people believe in the supernatural?

[Senor Hoint]

Yes. but we could collect evidence and then find out that you were pretending, and the tests would be fucked.

How could you prove I was pretending? I could just say I exercise my powers in mysterious ways...

The basic point is that believing in god is no different from believing in leprechauns. I don't need to provide evidence to dismiss a claim that has no evidence supporting it. Not to mention that god is an inherently unfalsifiable concept. What set of physical circumstances could possibly disprove the existence of a god? What experiment could we design to rule out the existence of a god?

[Cephus]

Then prove it. You make a very specific, positive statement, let's see you prove it.

It is belief in things for which there is no evidence. It's no different than believing in unicorns or Bigfoot. Believing things that are not real is delusion by definition.

[Elithium]

Do I need to prove that Hogwarts isn't real to state that it's a fairy tale? Or more aptly, do I need to prove that fairies aren't real to state that it's a fairy tale? Of course not.

Show me that the belief in the bible is less of a fairy tale than the belief in the koran. We are fairly confident that Mohammad actually existed as a person; no such claim can be made about Jesus, Moses, etc. Belief in Islam, while still delusional and retarded, is more logically sound than belief in Christianity.

Things are stated as being real when there is reason to believe they are real. There is no evidence to support the bible being anything more than a fairy tale. None. At all. If you disagree, please provide evidence of it.

The only thing you can claim is that you "have a personal relationship with god". Well, please explain that. Does god almighty speak with you? No, of course not (assuming you aren't actually insane here). So how do you have a "relationship" with some one that does not respond to you in any way at all?

You've never given any evidence to the contrary. You've claimed you don't need to.

[ironeagle]

Well first of all supernatural is really just a word used to describe things which are not known to be natural. Obviously if anything does in fact exist such as Aliens then they in fact are not supernatural at all. People often belive things because they see or hear orexperience them. They don't bind themselves by societoes "rules" or interpretations, nor do they all bind themseles with sel professed scholars and their "scientific" rules and conclusions. For example people once belived the world was flat, and the scholars of those days were self professed to have been right, but were later disproved. So when it comes to science we know that people are often found to be mistaken therefore there is reason to believe a person who experiences something "supernatural" is likley experiencing exactly what they say they did, the true question though is what is it and why. Many people also have belief systems because they are not scientificaly educated but then again can anyone here with 100% confidence really say they have any idea who or what created space, or where did the first matter come from, I think not. So why assume a magical entity or a God didn't create them? For thousands of years people around the world in all cultures have reported supernatural phenomenon, those people are clearly seeing and experiencing things which main stream would say do not exist. Again the main stream also once insisted the sun revolved around the earth. Just because we have not proven with science (to the main streams satasfaction) that ghosts exist, does not mean that they do not, nor does it mean a God doesn't exist. So I would conclude the reason people believe is because they don't need your (or main streams) approval to believe in things that in themselves they know to be true just because you don't believe in them.

[Robert]

Delusion: a fixed false belief that is resistant to reason or confrontation with actual fact.

That's religion.

Who's talking about religion? That is a catch all title which serves no purpose in this argument as it covers too many people and ideas, a lot of which will be flawed

[Robert]

Yeah, but they don't STOP there. A scientist might have a "gut feeling" that something is right, but you know something? He tests it! He demonstrates it! He doesn't just say "I think I'm right so I'm right!"

That's all that religion does. It takes a gut feeling and runs wild with it.

What about the multiverse? There are scientists who are passionate about that, yet there is no serious evidence to show for it, even though it is a good explanation. If your argument is that science can 'eventually' show something, then so what? The only difference with the end of the universe and meeting God, is the time scale. There is no reason to discount something just because you can't see it

[Elithium]

Religions are by default superstitions and are all applicable to this topic.

Who's talking about religion? That is a catch all title which serves no purpose in this argument as it covers too many people and ideas, a lot of which will be flawed

[Elithium]

Ask any scientist if they believe the multiverse is true and they will tell you no but that it might be true. For instance, earlier today I watched:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYeN66CSQhg

Even these scientists were slightly mocking about the multiverse theory. The sole advocate of the theory also stated that there's no reason to believe it is true.

There's a huge difference between believing something is true and believing something might be true. I consider god a possibility. Since there is no rational reason AT ALL to believe in god, such a belief is completely unjustified. To believe that god MIGHT exist is not irrational. Believing in any religion based on the existence of god is belief in a fairy tale as there is no evidence at all to validate the belief.

What about the multiverse? There are scientists who are passionate about that, yet there is no serious evidence to show for it, even though it is a good explanation. If your argument is that science can 'eventually' show something, then so what? The only difference with the end of the universe and meeting God, is the time scale. There is no reason to discount something just because you can't see it

[xx_mortekai_xx]

What about the multiverse? There are scientists who are passionate about that, yet there is no serious evidence to show for it, even though it is a good explanation. If your argument is that science can 'eventually' show something, then so what? The only difference with the end of the universe and meeting God, is the time scale. There is no reason to discount something just because you can't see it

what is it with you believers and thinking that non-believers have to "see" something to believe it?

I dont care if i see the thing. But there damn sure better be evidence to back up what you are saying, or I am going to mock you for it. Hence my treatment of you.

And the time to believe something is when there is evidence, not before. Before there is evidence, it is foolish to believe something, and that belief can only be based on opinion.

You have an opinion that god exists. You have continually failed to actually demonstrate that god's existence. Hence, your belief must necessarily be based on opinion. I mean, if you actually HAD evidence, you would have shown it by now.

[xx_mortekai_xx]

Well first of all supernatural is really just a word used to describe things which are not known to be natural. Obviously if anything does in fact exist such as Aliens then they in fact are not supernatural at all. People often belive things because they see or hear orexperience them. They don't bind themselves by societoes "rules" or interpretations, nor do they all bind themseles with sel professed scholars and their "scientific" rules and conclusions. For example people once belived the world was flat, and the scholars of those days were self professed to have been right, but were later disproved. So when it comes to science we know that people are often found to be mistaken therefore there is reason to believe a person who experiences something "supernatural" is likley experiencing exactly what they say they did, the true question though is what is it and why. Many people also have belief systems because they are not scientificaly educated but then again can anyone here with 100% confidence really say they have any idea who or what created space, or where did the first matter come from, I think not. So why assume a magical entity or a God didn't create them? For thousands of years people around the world in all cultures have reported supernatural phenomenon, those people are clearly seeing and experiencing things which main stream would say do not exist. Again the main stream also once insisted the sun revolved around the earth. Just because we have not proven with science (to the main streams satasfaction) that ghosts exist, does not mean that they do not, nor does it mean a God doesn't exist. So I would conclude the reason people believe is because they don't need your (or main streams) approval to believe in things that in themselves they know to be true just because you don't believe in them.

people are free to believe whatever stupid shit they like, but those people shouldnt be suprised when others find their belief stupid and say as much.

If you dont want people making fun of your beliefs, dont have stupid fucking beliefs.

And your post is nice and all, but you simply dont understand that claims mean nothing without support. You espouse personal experience over objective evidence as if saying you had an experience is somehow better than being able to show others that you did, and you are simply wrong.

[Jack]

There is no reason to discount something just because you can't see it

You're right, much of reality isn't immediate visible to us. But how can you state that about your god and not also apply it to evolution and other scientific matters? Why is it OK for Christians to discount evolution because they don't see it happening right in front of them but not OK for atheists to discount god for the same reason?

[xx_mortekai_xx]

You're right, much of reality isn't immediate visible to us. But how can you state that about your god and not also apply it to evolution and other scientific matters? Why is it OK for Christians to discount evolution because they don't see it happening right in front of them but not OK for atheists to discount god for the same reason?

dude, this one is easy. It goes against their preconceived notions.

god exists. they KNOW that. (I have had many believers tell me that they are "100% sure" that god exists). Any attempt to try and subvert that is just obviously wrong.