I had defined four subdefinitions of the (loaded) word "supernaturalism,
as follows:
> Supernaturalism(d)
Divine action, in the Christian orthodox tradition, unlimited.
> Supernaturalism(p)
Divine action, in the Process Theology view, somewhat limited; still >>
human capabilities.
> Supernaturalism(h)
Some human action. Severely limited, of course, but still sometimes
creative.
> Supernaturalism(a)
Some animal actions.
Howard observed that "Although human decision-making may be neither
"natural" (in the senses noted above) nor divine, it is fully a
creaturely action. Perhaps the distinction between "divine" and
"creaturely" action would be more fruitful than the one between natural
and non-natural (or supernatural, or extra-natural)."
One problem I have with that is that it appears that many of the actions
we humans perform are just by rote/habit, and to ascribe any free will to
them seems kind of silly. I think it is necessary to distinguish between,
say, a sneeze, or a reflexive turning of the head upon hearing someone
call our name, and a deliberate choice of choosing between two (or more)
alternative actions based upon considered thought.
Generally speaking, I do not choose to sneeze, and so I would not ascribe
any supernaturistic(h) characteristic to that action. But in responding
to your comments, I do ascribe supernaturalism(h).
Burgy
www.burgy.50megs.com
(source data on issues of science/theology, quantum mechanics,
baseball, ethics, humor, great cars, a story of God's
intervention into the natural causation of the universe, etc.)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jun 16 2001 - 11:55:11 EDT