First they came for elves, and I remained silent because I never met an elf. Then they came for Gods, and I remained silent because I never felt their presence. Then they came for ghosts, and I remained silent because I never saw a ghost. Then they came for consciousness, and I did not exist.
– Unknown mortal
***
Once upon a time man was born into a world full of wonder and terror. Earth seemed to expand into infinity, hiding who knew how many secrets. City lights did not yet blind us to the full glory of the night sky and the land was virgin and untamed. That there was a mysterious higher force behind nature seemed almost self-evident. Whence did everything come?
It didn’t take long for men to start drawing upon their experiences to create a worldview explaining how the cosmos functions. Untainted by grand abstract philosophies, they regarded everything they experienced as a real part of the world. Thus stood side by side weather and gods, medicine and magic, mathematics and astrology, architecture and geomancy. After all, things such as encounters with ghosts and other beings were already recorded in the texts of the earliest known civilization, Sumer. It is not particularly surprising, then, that most people up until quite recently considered them an indisputable part of life.
Yet it is true that atheists existed as early as ancient Greece. Were they the first ones to awake or to fall asleep? Were they, as modern discourse teaches, intellectual supermen that saw through the baseless beliefs of their kinsmen, or was the cause of their disbelief something else?
The fact that an individual can even be an atheist certainly tells us something about existence. Their philosophical arguments are not without merit, especially so in the domain of deconstructing rigid religious dogmas that curiously claim contradictory things while proclaiming themselves to be the sole possessors of truth. At the root of the materialist conviction, however, lies the absence of personal experience of the supernatural and the ensuing disappointment. The entire worldview rests on the notion that if I haven’t experienced something, everyone else must be mistaken about its existence. Any materialist reading this undoubtedly protests that his views rest on an objective and rational methodology, yet upon closer examination we will see that its foundations are as flimsy as of those who claim biological research proves the equality of all men, when it does the opposite.
Systemic hallucinations?
The materialists have developed their own ways of explaining the enduring presence of paranormal phenomena. The answer, they claim, is very simple. It’s all hallucinations born out of neurological errors. The perception of a supernatural event does not have its origin in the outside world. This is a legitimate theory, so let us put it to test.
First, we will analyze the ancient phenomenon of people reporting ghost sightings. There have been many accounts of witnessing translucent men that disappear into nowhere, and it is surely one of the most common supernatural occurrences. Materialists debunk them in the following way:
- If the event was witnessed by only one person, it is immediately dismissed as a hallucination.
- If the event was witnessed by several people, but they heard scary stories about the place beforehand, it is refused on the grounds of group hallucination and suggestion.
- If the event occurred unexpectedly and is attested to by several people that saw the exact same thing, it’s refused on the grounds that they must be lying and fantasizing.
The hallucination theory has subtle implications to it. If it’s correct, it follows that the events cannot, for example, relay information about a distant event or information that is independently verified by unsuspecting strangers (such as the same ghost in a specific that has been witnessed by people over decades). As such, the third category is the most revealing one. The only criterion by which the skeptic refutes it is his own idea of how the world should work. In other words, it is refused solely on ideological grounds.
Another common experience is that of departed loved ones visiting you. Surely, it must be only a coping mechanism of the mind stricken with grief. Yet when you speak to people who have experienced this, when you read the literature, and listen to interviews dealing with this topic, you will find out one peculiar thing: it is not uncommon for people to experience a vivid dream barely distinguishable from waking reality in which a loved one, who just unexpectedly died, says his farewells, before anyone even knows it through material means. I have personally spoken with a woman that experienced a dream visitation simultaneously with her brother and there have been similar testimonies in my family. How do the so called skeptics explain this? They don’t. These cases must not have happened, because they cannot explain them within their hallucination paradigm.
Should they be forced to explain them, they have no option but to call the witnesses liars. In that case, however, they have another problem to deal with. These cases are qualitatively the same as those that they happily include in their debunking tomes. Therefore the phenomena that they can reasonably explain (i.e. the first and second category) are considered real but hallucinatory, and those that they cannot explain are deemed to be outright fabrications. It is as if a doctor testing his experimental treatment of fever used a particular thermometer to note down patient’s temperatures but insisted that when it shows someone still has a fever, it’s an error of the thermometer, which he then merrily continues to use for measurements that fit his theory.
To drive the point even further, let us briefly consider the mysterious ball lightning. It’s essentially a floating spherical object of light that appears suddenly and without an apparent cause. Reports vary widely: it can pass through walls, leave burn marks, explode, be multicolored, smell of sulfur, and so on. It is a very rare phenomenon that has been reported all over the world. Despite the fact that apparitions and ghosts are more common, it’s taken more seriously. How is that possible? Why is a group of people that witnesses a ball of light passing through walls inside a building considered credible, while the same group witnessing a ghost passing through would be laughed at? Since ball lightning is regarded as a purely physical phenomenon, it doesn’t threaten the preconceived materialist notions of how the world should work.
Thus materialists with their grand abstract theories removed from reality stoop down to the level of the belief in systemic racism, only here they substitute all-powerful racism with all-powerful hallucinations. For thousands of years and in every place they have ever been, blacks end up living in crime and poverty. The mysterious force of racism is somehow responsible for their problems even in places far removed from other races. Likewise, ghosts and the dead – not to mention other beings – have presented themselves to mankind for millennia. Ancient peoples were not fools, they discussed myths, religious beliefs, and supernatural events. They were more than capable of logical reasoning. Pliny the Elder – wondering whether it could be true – recounted a tale of a man who had a near-death-experience and saw that his brother, who was far away at the time, was dead. When he came back into his body, he later found out that the brother really died. In modern research, NDEs where people discover someone else died and relay the information before anyone knows it by material means are called “Peak in Darien.”
Despite what the skeptics might believe, the doctors researching NDEs are well aware that the burden of proof is on them. The crux of their work revolves around validating what the almost-dead individual saw in an “out-of-body” state. Their unanimous conclusion after examining thousands of cases and questioning the medical personal, who affirm patient’s claims, is that people during NDEs are able to accurately describe what was happening, both visually and auditorily, not only inside the operating room but also in other ones.
Deep down, we all know that if several people sitting at a table witness some sudden and unexpected event, it simply happened. No, their biochemical processes in the brain didn’t just randomly sync up to create a coordinated group hallucination. It takes a special kind of demented circular reasoning to absolutely reject the possibility of supernatural phenomena. “Apparitions are just baseless hallucinations and if an apparition happened before anyone knew the person was dead it must be a lie, because we know apparitions are hallucinations.” Does this sound familiar? This is the same type of thinking employed by anti-racists. “Sure, some research suggests that IQ is hereditary and it differs among races, but it can’t be right since we already know every race is equal, so what’s the fuss about?” As in Marxism, a beloved grand theory takes precedence over reality.
I implore materialists reading this to rethink whether their worldview is so ironclad and whether they really know as much about supernatural experiences as they believe.
Note on religion and the supernatural
All this sounds interesting, you may think, but then why do religions across the world seem to disagree with each other, unlike science? We are dealing with frontiers of knowledge here and so it happens that the frontiers of science are just as fecund with irreconcilable and unverifiable theories. Having exhausted the possibilities of modern technology, we are now staring at an impenetrable wall. The mystery of dark matter, for example, may be as disappointing as that it simply can’t ever be detected by human instruments. It is normal within physics for laws to be valid only within a limited framework. The laws of classical physics are valid only on a certain scale. Apply them on a quantum scale, and they cease to be correct. Just because the supernatural cannot be explained within classical physics does not mean that it does not exist. It has its own logic and laws largely unknown to humans.
The more fleeting something is the harder it is to study it and arrive at conclusions. This is as true for physical phenomena as for the supernatural. If physicists have their personal theories that clash with others and can likely never be verified it should not be surprising that metaphysicians have their own conflicting ideas.
Leveling of reality
People aware of themselves as more than mere physical bioelectrical systems, aware of more than just eating, fornicating, aging, and dying bodies run headlong into the isolation imposed upon them as a result of the other obiter dictum that holds that, if a person feels he is more than just body, he is wrong.
To thoroughly participate in physical life and be respectable among one’s contemporaries, one had best reduce one’s awareness to fit. And so people usually do.
– Ingo Swann, To Kiss The Earth Goodbye
Having dealt with the dialectical side of the issue, let us turn toward the metaphysical and (meta)psychological. Why do so many people feel disconnect from anything transcendent?
Many a reader of this essay would agree that egalitarianism is nonsense. There are people who are inherently superior by the virtue of their inborn qualities. A genius cannot lend his capabilities to an average man no more than he can give sight to a blind man. There is therefore an impassable disconnect between them. Minds differ greatly in how they process information and what information they process. As far as their individual experiences go, we might, if we are feeling bold, say that they quite literally live in different worlds.
One can easily underestimate the aristocratic nature of the senses. We take it for granted that people walking on the same street are perceiving it more or less identically. Nevertheless, there is not a single sense that does not greatly differ between individuals. Everyone has experienced a disagreement with a fellow human about sensory input. Is it this color or that one? Do you hear the hum or not? Do you smell that? Is the water cold or hot? And it isn’t just about raw data either: A highly intelligent person taking an IQ test sees patterns where the less intelligent sees only gibberish.
Some people lack a physical sense altogether. Let’s imagine a world where humans and animals don’t exhibit the sense of smell save for a very specific chemical under unknown circumstances. This chemical forms and dissolves rather quickly, but humans encounter it often enough – on average two times during a lifetime – that tales about the strange sensation of smell have been recorded since the dawn of history, and people still report its occurrence. Undoubtedly, there would be skeptics, “champions of reason,” arguing that it is a mere hallucination.
Supernatural phenomena in our world are in a similar position. It’s practically impossible to foretell them. And since we are taught that everything in life revolves around perpetually filling the senses with stimuli, the chance that we will ever notice something beyond the deafening music in our ears and the never-ending stream of images on our displays is slim. When it nonetheless does by some miracle penetrate the incessant noise, our teachers – often the same Marxist-adjacent academics who taught us to race doesn’t exist – duly instruct us to dismiss it as an illusion.
A stellar example of such an all-knowing intellectual is Michael Shermer, the co-founder of The Skeptical Society and something of an atheist superstar, “the vanquisher of pseudoscience.” Among others, he dedicated his work to exposing the “irrational folly” of racialism and doubting the Holocaust.
In a blog post that was both admirable and pathetic, ”Infrequencies,” Shermer revealed that after his wife’s grandfather died he experienced a minor strange event of his own and struggled to interpret it skeptically, ending the post with the following words:
I have to admit, it rocked me back on my heels and shook my skepticism to its core as well. I savored the experience more than the explanation.
The emotional interpretations of such anomalous events grant them significance regardless of their causal account. And if we are to take seriously the scientific credo to keep an open mind and remain agnostic when the evidence is indecisive or the riddle unsolved, we should not shut the doors of perception when they may be opened to us to marvel in the mysterious.
The same man that wrote this spent the preceding decades telling people that no, their supernatural experiences absolutely could not be real. He published a book after book proudly explaining “in-depth” the “fallacious and subjective” nature of such beliefs. And yet it took one insignificant event that even I wouldn’t consider particularly interesting for him to be “shaken to his core.”
As I previously suggested, the materialist conviction is born out of personal bitterness at not having experienced anything profoundly supernatural. It’s an attempt to drag everyone down to the same level, an egalitarian doctrine par excellence. It’s not very different in its methods and rhetoric from other egalitarian ideologies. Unsurprisingly, it’s one of the “elite” beliefs among academics signaling how noble and clever they are. Locked inside their ivory towers, they construct elaborate theories purporting to explain subjects that they conveniently have little to no real experience and knowledge of: systemic racism, Freudian psychoanalysis, Marxist economics, materialism, etc. All try to shove the real world into their narrow box of how the world should work like according to their cherished beliefs.
The plight of the modern world comes from its insistence that everyone has to agree and understand. What this inadvertently results in is that any egalitarian ideology can only consider that which is common to both idiots and geniuses, the blind and the sighted. Hence modern politics and culture revolve around promises to fulfill physiological needs. Nothing else is permitted to be considered, since it does not exist for everyone.
People of yore, who saw oaths as supernaturally binding and consequently preferred death to dishonor, are portrayed as alien and foolish, because honor is not a property that can be dissected and bodily existence is all there is.
The greatest tragedy of present humanity is that it has convinced itself feelings, thoughts, and other living forces are mere metaphors for activities of matter when the opposite is true. A detailed examination of the classic materialist theory of consciousness reveals that it is completely nonsensical and contradictory. It is easy to forget that from the materialist point of view, the clever abstraction called “neuron” is nothing more than a group of atoms. Does it make any sense whatsoever that deterministic “domino effects” between atoms became conscious when they are connected in a particular way? It’s beyond the scope of this essay to deal with the topic in great detail, but it has not escaped my attention that Annaka Harris, an author and wife of the influential atheist and neuroscientist Sam Harris, has reached the inescapable conclusion that a thorough analysis of the claim that inner experience is an illusory epiphenomenon of matter is logically incoherent. Honest atheists (now more of an agnostic) like the content creator Alex O’Connor, who interviewed Annaka Harris on this topic, admit that indeed consciousness must somehow be a fundamental quality.
Concluding thoughts
Our enemies have deconstructed race, sex, optimism, religion, natalism, heroism, self-sacrifice, and just about anything that gives man a sense of purpose and order in life. Now they are busy deconstructing themselves. Consciousness does not exist. Free will does not exist. You do not exist. Good, let them believe that. While they sit in their in their rooms full of doubt, angst, and sorrow, we sow the seeds of a future world, our world.
They, projecting their inner turmoil and emptiness, see nothing but darkness. Humans are just meat puppets in a gloomy, oppressive mechanical universe, are they not? Let us be Aryans. Let us know that after each night comes day and that life is full of mysteries. Gods, elves, gnomes, spirits, demons, and magic never left us.

23 comments
Counter Currents, harvesting the thumos of ghosts since 2010.
Falsifying materialism doesn’t prove anything about whether there is any meaning or objective morality in the world. There can be a universe with material and spiritual substances which is still completely meaningless. And of course a hardcore skeptic may always even question the existence of the empirical world (Descartes had his “Evil Demon”, modern version of the thought experiment being Brain in a vat).
In the end, it is really about belief and nothing else. We must believe something and then act accordingly. William James writes in his essay Is Life Worth Living?:
“If this life be not a real fight, in which something is eternally gained for the Universe by success, it is no better than a game of private theatricals from which one may withdraw at will. But it feels like a real fight; as if there were something really wild in the Universe which we, with all our idealities and faithfulnesses, are needed to redeem. And first of all to redeem our own hearts from atheisms and fears. For such a half-wild, half-saved universe our nature is adapted.”
Sure, you are right, it does not prove an objective morality — at least not in the typical Abrahamic sense — and I claim no such thing in the essay. For the most part, I believe in an objective morality in so far as it is identified with laws of the cosmos. To put it in Vedic terms, you are free to do in Samsara whatever you wish but everything has its consequences.
“In the end, it is really about belief and nothing else.”
Is that not in line with what I wrote in the conclusion? People deconstruct everything meaningful out of their own will. They chose to suffer. They are like like a man who contracted the plague and in his spite wishes to bring the whole world down with him.
“And of course a hardcore skeptic may always even question the existence of the empirical world.”
Well, you tell me, Julius Strange, do they do a very thorough job? The average skeptic is quick to question anything that gives man joy and purpose. They seldom question the existence of matter itself. They believe happiness is an illusion, but suffering and injustice somehow seem to exist objectively (beliefs such as depressive realism, Benatar’s antinatalism, and so on). They are far from the true, ideologically consistent Buddhists, who deny the ultimate reality of everything and thus of suffering too, once you reach Nirvana and rid yourself of all delusion. This is something I touch upon in the upcoming second part of the essay.
I have to question your quickness to assert doubt and no meaning in the world. We discuss the possibility that we are eternal spirits in a world full of literal magic, and the afterlife, and your first reaction is to shrink back. Be a little more light-hearted.
“Let us be Aryans”. Maybe the greatest line I’ve read on this site. I’m with you, brother. Let the eggheads ponder their navels while we build a world for our children.
First off, we should drop the worn out Aryan nonsense. We are simply White.
As for the supernatural vs materialism argument — I think materialism is likely the truth because it is always there no matter what. It “works” even if you don’t believe in it.
Whereas, the supernatural cannot be shown to exist outside of our imagination.
That said, I agree that being too logical is not good for human flourishing, and we need something more than the scientific worldview.
“First off, we should drop the worn out Aryan nonsense. We are simply White.”
To me, the term white is purely biological. I use Aryan, on the other hand, to denote the highest possibility of our race, the spiritual elite, if you will. A drug addict married to a black can be white but he certainly can’t be Aryan in this sense.
“As for the supernatural vs materialism argument — I think materialism is likely the truth because it is always there no matter what. It “works” even if you don’t believe in it.
Whereas, the supernatural cannot be shown to exist outside of our imagination.”
You say it works even if you don’t believe in it. Alright. But if you read the essay carefully, this is precisely the type of argument that I address. The supernatural also happens spontaneously. How else does one describe a sudden visitation from someone deceased saying his farewells, when nobody knew he died yet? This a common occurence, and sometimes multiple people experience it as well. The same goes for NDE research that I mention. A case after case where doctors corroborate that the clinically dead patient saw things outside the room and so on. And I experienced other strange things of my own that happened without expectation.
You may choose not to believe in it, but that stems out of your own personal (in)experience with the things discussed and not from anything objective. I discuss such points in the article.
Nobody can prove the supernatural exists. If someone tells me they were visited by the spirits of their grandparents or whatever, I have no way of verifying that. We only have their word to go on.
Sure, but you have not even attempted to read the research on NDEs, ESP, apparitions of the deceased, ghosts, and so on, have you? You can doubt it without reading a single piece of it, but then you are not much better than those that call race realist scientists frauds based on preconceived ideas. Again, I literally discuss this argument in the article.
I don’t expect anyone to suddenly turn their beliefs upside down after reading the article. I would hope, however, that some materialists might realise that the issue is not as simple as people like Michael Shermer would you like to believe.
I used to read a lot about research on the paranormal. It was always the same thing over and over; unprovable experiences that could be better explained as something else by science.
From a philosophical standpoint, there is no real difference between “natural” and “supernatural”. It’s an arbitrary distinction. There is just reality – a reality that can have more dimensions and varied phenomena than mainstream science is currently willing to acknowledge.
Hence, if you’re gonna apply radical and stubborn doubt to the “supernatural”, you must also apply it to every mundane fact you think you know about the world to be consistent. For example, you don’t know whether the world you experience is actually materially real or just a hallucination, persistent dream or computer simulation (see “brain in a vat” thought experiment). You also don’t know whether your living grandfather you met yesterday is still the same person today (people could be “rebooted” every day, Ship of Theseus-problem etc).
Philosophical recommendation: Study phenomenology/read Heidegger
Scientific recommendation: Study parapsychology/read Sheldrake
Nonsense. “Natural” and “Supernatural” mean two different things.
If science could discover that the supernatural is real, then it would just become natural.
“Aryan” is a broad term applying to most White people both genetically and linguistically. I think it’s ok to use if not overused or confused with the term “White”.
The myth of the Aryans is one of our myths. We should cherish all myths we have and not allow for competition between them. They’re like the interlocking circles in the logo of the Olympic Games (five circles on a white field).
https://media.firstsportz.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/24065919/Adobe_Post_20210609_1608080.3313690189185631.jpg
We need reality, not myths.
The term Aryan was only used by the branch of Indo-Europeans who migrated to India and Iran. It never meant all Indo-European speakers.
“We need reality, not myths.”
Why the either-or? Myth is that which never was but always is
“The term Aryan was only used by the branch of Indo-Europeans who migrated to India and Iran. It never meant all Indo-European speakers.”
a) the Greek aristos (“best of its kind, noblest, bravest, most virtuous”), whence the English word “aristocratic” comes from, is related to “Aryan”. See also the crucial Greek concept of aretē (“rank, nobility, moral virtue, excellence,”)
b) “Aryan” is a valid general term for the Steppe cultures that shaped the European Bronze Age
Indo-European word similarities don’t mean anything. The term Aryan was never used to mean all IE speakers. It’s as simple as that.
There’s an interesting SCOTUS ruling mentioning “white” & “Aryan” from 1923:
Bhagat Singh Thind, an Indian Sikh, and politically subversive activist, argued he should be allowed to become a U.S. citizen because he identified as “Aryan”–
https://indiaspora.org/feature_story/100-years-later-embracing-our-legacy-of-dr-bhagat-singh-thind/
Fun fact: Los Angeles has become so third-worldy, laws have been proposed to eliminate caste discrimination:
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2023-10-07/california-gov-newsom-vetoes-bill-banning-caste-discrimination-in-the-workplace-housing-and-beyond
What a shameless attempt to use of the concept of the “Aryan” that was!
Modern Brahmins have been found with up to ca. 24% Steppe i.e. Aryan heritage (north Indian Brahmins). If you want to compute the relatively exact percentages for different Indian groups, look at the “North_European” ancestry component % in the following list and divide it by 0.57 (because the Sintashta/Andronovo peoples had about 57% of that component):
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1GWhNZcfTQ2hMSK9Ni1IqG7aXHB00SRE5L6ED2osPs9M/edit?gid=0#gid=0
Great article! White peoples are always going to need a romantic, spiritual ideal to aspire to. 🙃
This article is highly thought provoking but not entirely convincing. I’m not sure if the author is advocating for paganism or some other religion or just a general belief in the supernatural. Some religions may be truer than others. The author Colin Cleary’s work seems to suggest that maybe there isn’t anything supernatural in the occult, or hauntings, or alien abductions. Maybe these phenomena exist in a material world where their explanation is beyond detection by the scientific method. Since, I find most religious views to be tainted by group identity rationalization, I prefer to take the view that paranormal phenomena is still part of a material reality that is not supernatural. Since this article doesn’t make any definite statement of what reality should be considered once materialism is rejected, I don’t understand the point.
“The author Colin Cleary’s work seems to suggest that maybe there isn’t anything supernatural in the occult, or hauntings, or alien abductions. Maybe these phenomena exist in a material world where their explanation is beyond detection by the scientific method.”
You are slightly missing the point. I used the term materialism as a convenient umbrella term for the sake of simplicity. You are right that strictly speaking you can be a materialist and accept the existence of such phenomena.
“I prefer to take the view that paranormal phenomena is still part of a material reality that is not supernatural.”
This is just a matter of semantics. The material and the supernatural are one reality. Again, I used the term supernatural for the sake of simplicity, because everyone knows what is meant by it – things that are deemed impossible in the (typical) materialist worldview.
“Since this article doesn’t make any definite statement of what reality should be considered once materialism is rejected, I don’t understand the point.”
Well, that may be because this is only the first part of three. However, I still don’t get what’s the problem, even if it were only a one part essay. If an essay exposes some part of reality do you expect the author to hand you down a complete worldview? I write in the Note on religion that we are having this discussion precisely because it’s impossible to arrive at any concrete conclusions, except that the phenomena are a real part of reality.
The point of the article is to shine a new light on an issue that has been treated in the mainstream in a similar way to race realism. A false image has been perpetrated that there doesn’t exist serious research and that its opponents have irrefutable arguments, when they don’t. If a scientist’s research says that races are not equal he must be a racist fraud, and a liar. If a scientist’s research says that supernatural phenomena are real he must be a madman, and a liar.
The books I have read on near death experiences and related phenomena outside the 3D 5-sense reality of felt everyday familiars has me convinced, though I have never experienced anything of my own. What would the ‘science says’ people bloviating on about ‘peer-reviewed studies’ and ‘sources’ say about Dr. Eben Alexander? Is he a crank to the militant skeptic whose arrogance makes so many of them just miserably unpleasant fucks to listen to. I believe a lot of them distrust-and quite frankly, hate-people who have authentically experienced paranormal, supernatural, or whatever the proper term for something one swore has occurred elsewhere that’s undetectable to the senses, and harshly dismiss them as if they’re a ‘psychic’ obvious fraud like sylvia browne, theresa caputo, or matt fraser. Their lifelong propagandization has ironically shut off any skepticism towards their own beliefs and anyone not in the same ‘reality tunnel’ as them is a dullard. This is the “question everything, question authority” crowd. Just never themselves, racial reality, or liberal oligarchy. James Randi at least did not come off as a pompous know-it-all but his debunkings were against low-hanging fruit like uri gellar and some professed spoon-bender on TV who ended up institutionalized. Bill Maher’s annoying snark grinds my gears but I find it almost impossible to hate Penn Jillette since I was a fan of Bullshit! on Showtime years ago.
The problem is that materialism, the way it is understood today, is nonsense from a philosophical standpoint.
The world we are actually living in is not a world of atoms and molecules, but a world of real things (stones, soil, water drops, trees etc) and phenomena (hence phenomenology).
The world of atoms, molecules or subatomic particles is a useful metaphor for explaining many things in physics, but it was never meant to be taken literal. In other words, “matter” does not exist, except in the minds of scientists and possibly in a parallel dimension to ours. The real world is a world of phenomena, not matter.
Great article.
i am not a materialist. There are too many problems with materialism. And it’s not just the consciousness problem, NED, and other supernatural phenomenon that calls materialism into question. We also cannot begin to explain life. We don’t have the slightest clue how evolution really works. And finally, Who or what is the first cause? These questions point us to God. If someone tells me they believe in ghosts (and that’s reasonable to me), my next question is “do you believe in God?’. Honest question. Seems like they go hand in hand.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.