Differences between real miracles and fantasy
I think miracles are rightly defined as the temporary interruption of the regular functioning of things.
I intend in this thread to discuss both the differences between miracles and fantasy and also why some very intelligent people believe fantasy.
I can understand why people believe the kind of miracles described in Judaism, Christianity or Islam for that matter. They are clearly portrayed as one-off events, that are, for the most part, not reproducible, nor in the control of human beings (for the most part).
However, there are some books which are literarily crazy with regards to the events they portray. For example, I remember reading Autobiography of a Yogi about 6-7 years back, and being literarily shocked by the statements: teleportation, creating a palace in the middle of the Himalayas out of nothing, commonly occurring resurrection, predicting mundane events, treating disease by outright refusing medicine and relying on 'mind powers', etc.
But there are smart people, for example Steve Jobs, who did a similar thing by refusing surgery for cancer, and ended up dying. So where do we draw the boundary between miracles and fantasy, and why is it that some intelligent and very pragmatic people believe fantasy?
I intend in this thread to discuss both the differences between miracles and fantasy and also why some very intelligent people believe fantasy.
I can understand why people believe the kind of miracles described in Judaism, Christianity or Islam for that matter. They are clearly portrayed as one-off events, that are, for the most part, not reproducible, nor in the control of human beings (for the most part).
However, there are some books which are literarily crazy with regards to the events they portray. For example, I remember reading Autobiography of a Yogi about 6-7 years back, and being literarily shocked by the statements: teleportation, creating a palace in the middle of the Himalayas out of nothing, commonly occurring resurrection, predicting mundane events, treating disease by outright refusing medicine and relying on 'mind powers', etc.
But there are smart people, for example Steve Jobs, who did a similar thing by refusing surgery for cancer, and ended up dying. So where do we draw the boundary between miracles and fantasy, and why is it that some intelligent and very pragmatic people believe fantasy?
Comments (33)
And I think that your definition sucks, by the way. It's too vague and inclusive. Is a power cut a miracle? Is constipation?
Quoting Agustino
Yeah, wishful thinking. That's why.
Quoting Agustino
Even smart people can do foolish things or have the odd poorly founded belief. It's just part and parcel of being human. I'm not necessarily saying that what Steve Jobs did was foolish, or that it was based on a poorly founded belief, but it could have been. I don't know enough about it, so I can't really comment.
So materializing a palace in the middle of the Himalayas is just "coincidence"? :P
Quoting praxis
Thanks for the book, haven't read it. However, I should note that I have no doubt that the mind influences the physical health of the body, and can even cure the body in some cases. However, the problem is with refusing conventional medicine which has been shown in once circumstance to have good outcomes in order to attempt to heal solely through the mind.
For example, if there was a surgery with 90% chance of success that could cure you of a serious disease, would you refuse the surgery and attempt to cure yourself through the mind alone?
Quoting Sapientia
:-d - obviously I mean an interruption of the laws of physics.
Looks fascinating.
Have a read of Pondering Miracles, Medical and Religious, by Jacalyn Duffin, a medical scientist who was unexpectedly contacted as an expert in the adjudication of a claim of a miraculous cure of cancer:
The problem with the idea of miracles, for many people, is that they rely, consciously or otherwise, on the non-occurrence of such anomalous happenings. The fact of scientific regularity and predictability provides a kind of handle on what to consider reasonable; talk of miracles undermines that sense of certainty.
Did that happen or didn’t you say it was a fantasy?
So let’s get back to miracles. Usually they are things that happen. Then intelligent folk would have to decide whether to attribute them to divine intervention or mere coincidence.
Where ought we draw the line would you say?
You didn’t mention this, but a copy of Autobiography of a Yogi was given to every guest at Steve Jobs’ funeral [sup] 1.[/sup]
I think it was fantasy, but there are obviously some people who claim that it did happen.
Quoting apokrisis
That is a more difficult and different than the questions I was asking in the OP. It depends on the context. If I say - "now I will walk on water" and then walk on water it will be different than if I just try to go into the water and happen to walk on it for a second or so.
Quoting Wayfarer
Well, personally I rely on their very rare occurence, not their entire non-occurrence.
Quoting Wayfarer
If we have the miracles become frequent, day-to-day things, then certainly. Would you not say that having everyday miracles would undermine the sense of certainty we get from our scientific understanding?
Quoting Wayfarer
Thanks, interesting. I knew he liked the book and read it, but I didn't know he gave a copy at his funeral. But that even proves my point even more. I think he was influenced by such reading, which caused him to take a decision that ended in his death. He could very likely have saved himself had he listened to his doctors. So it seems strange that he was such a pragmatic person in business - obviously not some wishy-washy type who lived in a dream world and couldn't get things done - and yet, when it came to his physical health, he adopted such a wishy-washy approach instead of relying on the certainty of medical science.
Yeah, that's similar to my position.
The strange part about this is that you'd expect someone who is pragmatic in one area of his life to be able to take this same pragmatism and apply it to other areas, but apparently not in this case. I think he overestimated his own powers.
Hmm, that's interesting but isn't Eastern mysticism quite frequently against "making a dent in the Universe" - I mean it's not like Buddhism or Hinduism love ambition as an attitude no?
Apple logo is bitten apple, a symbol of man's rebellion against God in the garden. They seem to be proud of man's fallen state.
First Apple computer was sold for $666. This number is mark of the beast, explicitly revealed in the Bible as a mark for man or woman who follows satan. One of the Apple ads for their first computer said: "Byte into an Apple for 666."
One of their early ads was depicting Adam hiding his nakedness with computer, with snake behind him.
One of their main marketing themes throughout the years was rebellion. How hip. But what's the ultimate Apple's rebellion? It's against true God, the God of the Bible, as they have shown enough for all who are open to see.
By the way, Bible reveals that earthly riches follow those in this world who do most work for satan.
:s :-}
That's why John D. Rockefeller or King Solomon were the wealthiest men who ever lived?
I don't know what that's got to do with satanic Apple company. There's an answer to your question and it starts with understanding that God's creation is complex. There are always exceptions, to put it simply.
Jesus said: "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven."
Solomon did a lot of work for satan, by the way, in later part of his life. He is probably saved person, but we could generally say that's not the norm in God's creation.
That depends on the procedure. You may be proceeding from a misconception however, the mere belief that a surgical procedure has the power to cure can be as beneficial as any faith healing, perhaps even more benefit for some.
The miracles are to the book like advertising are to services and products in our economy. They're there to either seduce you or repel you but the goal of Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism is to get beyond that. Miracles belong to the realm of phenomena which Yogis are not supposed to be interested in. Yogananda even talks about it in the book, between all the bullshit miracles.
The problem with you, Agustinino, is that you don't have the proper attitude to get to the astral plane, where you then can witness miracles (like all that good advertising which will help you to get more cash in this bullshit world of miracles and advertising).
Everything is a miracle, but a miracle of absolute bullshit and absurdity.
The secret connection between Steve Jobs and Yogananda is miraculous style written over the bullshit mundanity of life: Advertising.
Well, why didn't you say so? Wording is important when coming up with a definition.
Quoting Agustino
Of course not! That'd be crazy, unless you have a death wish.
Sounds like the title of a discussion created by Robert Lockhart.
By this definition, a miracle would be an event that excited scientists to find an explanation --which is to say an unknown pattern in which such an event fits. Ideally this unknown pattern would extend and not violate the system of established patterns.
It seems to me that the impossibility of miracle as you define it would happen only at the ideal end of science. And then it would rest on the assumption that reality was truly law-like. (See Hume's problem of induction.) Finally, it's my impression that our world is a sort of casino. Extremely unlikely things could happen accordingly to the laws of physics as I non-expertly understand them. The system is not deterministic. 'God' plays dice.
Quoting Joel Bingham
I'm not a theist, but I think this is too simplified. Religion was not, in my view, just proto-science. We don't just want to understand the world conceptually. We want to feel a certain way in it and about it. We want to feel a certain way about the place of our community in it. If religion is just bad science, then flags and anthems are just bad science?
You'd need a miracle to believe that nonsense
However, it's a very big leap to attribute miracles to God or something supernatural. I think that's where people make the mistake.
If you think of things like quantum entanglement, there is a possibility that such phenomenon is attributable to interactions we do not yet understand, but the problem is mostly where people are vulnerable to believe in unrealistic and even irrational things and project that psychological experience to the natural world. They explain the experience using religious themes mostly because the latter allows them to due because of the all-encompassing supernatural content.
Look at theosophy - this cohort openly believe in the devil and that there are spirits in higher plains surrounding us. They went so far as to try and make Krishnamurti into the Maitreya of whatever bullshit they believe in.
:D...that's funny.