Researcher Bias: The supernatural concept is unscientific and totally lacks any real-world context which Kant, Sherif, and McGilChrist say is required, The Materialist Definist Fallacy, no proper categorize types "rigid adherence" to quantification (

Real World Context-Evidence vs the Supernatural - "When logic and proportion Have fallen sloppy dead And the White Knight is talking backwards" (Jefferson Airplane 1960's White rabbit song) Real World Context-Evidence: 1. Immanuel Kant: "If a concept lacks reference to any object of possible experience…. It "has no meaning and is completely lacking in content" (P.15 Kant's Theory of Symbolism, John D Glenn Jr) 2. Muzafer Sherif "emphasizes that real world contexts are important, even if regarded as "messy" compared to controlled lab experiments." Wikipedia 3. Iain McGilchrist argues that "neglect of context is the greatest single disaster which philosophic thinking can incur." "Real World Context-Evidence" for spirituality would be "people" – not abstractions like the "supernatural." The "supernatural" or "supernatural beings" is a widespread maladaptive stereotype! By definition, it is beyond or outside the scope of scientific inquiry – which makes it a loaded term =- categorizing that as a "Definist" -fallacy and worthless, meaningless word. The definition of supernatural in Dictionary: of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature. The supernatural concept is widespread and frequently found in definitions of myths or prophecy. I asked my Filipina partner – who is Catholic – if God is "supernatural." I then pointed out that Jesus Christ never once used the world "supernatural" and describes the Holy spirit as "Spirit and Truth". She then agreed that the "supernatural" did not unequivocally equate to the "Biblical God" From extensive research & experience, it is readily apparent that spirituality got entangled in abstractions: the supernatural-unreal, powers, crystal ball vision, etc. If spirituality is about something it would be about "people." The "supernatural" concept has zero real-world context evidence! Peer Reviewed Critique of Materialism Endorsed by Four Very Prominent Psychologists and Medical Researchers A. The psychologists, William R. Miller and Carl E. Thoresen, state in their article,

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Knowledge Commons (Lakehead University)
Published
2025-04-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.17613/76cb8-bd891
Primary Topic
Paranormal Experiences and Beliefs
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Researcher Bias: The supernatural concept is unscientific and totally lacks any real-world context which Kant, Sherif, and McGilChrist say is required, The Materialist Definist Fallacy, no proper categorize types "rigid adherence" to quantification (

Knowledge Commons (Lakehead University)
Paranormal Experiences and Beliefs
article

Researcher Bias: The supernatural concept is unscientific and totally lacks any real-world context which Kant, Sherif, and McGilChrist say is required, The Materialist Definist Fallacy, no proper categorize types "rigid adherence" to quantification (

article en

Abstract

Real World Context-Evidence vs the Supernatural - "When logic and proportion Have fallen sloppy dead And the White Knight is talking backwards" (Jefferson Airplane 1960's White rabbit song) Real World Context-Evidence: 1. Immanuel Kant: "If a concept lacks reference to any object of possible experience…. It "has no meaning and is completely lacking in content" (P.15 Kant's Theory of Symbolism, John D Glenn Jr) 2. Muzafer Sherif "emphasizes that real world contexts are important, even if regarded as "messy" compared to controlled lab experiments." Wikipedia 3. Iain McGilchrist argues that "neglect of context is the greatest single disaster which philosophic thinking can incur." "Real World Context-Evidence" for spirituality would be "people" – not abstractions like the "supernatural." The "supernatural" or "supernatural beings" is a widespread maladaptive stereotype! By definition, it is beyond or outside the scope of scientific inquiry – which makes it a loaded term =- categorizing that as a "Definist" -fallacy and worthless, meaningless word. The definition of supernatural in Dictionary: of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature. The supernatural concept is widespread and frequently found in definitions of myths or prophecy. I asked my Filipina partner – who is Catholic – if God is "supernatural." I then pointed out that Jesus Christ never once used the world "supernatural" and describes the Holy spirit as "Spirit and Truth". She then agreed that the "supernatural" did not unequivocally equate to the "Biblical God" From extensive research & experience, it is readily apparent that spirituality got entangled in abstractions: the supernatural-unreal, powers, crystal ball vision, etc. If spirituality is about something it would be about "people." The "supernatural" concept has zero real-world context evidence! Peer Reviewed Critique of Materialism Endorsed by Four Very Prominent Psychologists and Medical Researchers A. The psychologists, William R. Miller and Carl E. Thoresen, state in their article,

Knowledge Commons (Lakehead University)
The Centers (US)
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 48%
Paranormal Experiences and Beliefs
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Researcher Bias: The supernatural concept is unscientific and totally lacks any real-world context which Kant, Sherif, and McGilChrist say is required, The Materialist Definist Fallacy, no proper categorize types "rigid adherence" to quantification ( · Knowledge Commons (Lakehead University) (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS