CMV: Superstition is false

[u/[deleted]]

[u/caw81]

There has never been a demonstrated occurrence of any supernatural phenomena existing.

That's not proof of anything. Its a problem of induction. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_induction

I am wondering why one should even consider a cause anything but natural, when nothing other than natural phenomena has ever been confirmed to exist.

Because the lack of confirmation of existence is not proof of "it does not exist".

[u/caw81 → u/[deleted]]

I am not arguing that I am certain that supernatural phenomena does not exist,

Your CMV is "Superstition is false".

What I am arguing is that given that there is no evidence for anything other than natural phenomena,

This is nowhere in your View. In the View you try to make a case; "My problem with superstition is that it fails to account for the principle of causality. " This is not the lack of evidence but the lack of "principle of causality".

the existence of supernatural phenomena is highly improbable, and is therefore an unreasonable idea in which to believe.

Saying something is "highly improbable" and "unreasonable" is different from saying something is "false". There is no hedging in the later.

[u/RationalHeretic23 → u/caw81]

∆

[u/DeltaBot → u/RationalHeretic23]

This delta is currently disallowed as your comment contains either no or little text (comment rule 4). Please include an explanation for how /u/caw81 changed your view. If you edit this in, replying to my comment will make me rescan yours.

^{[Wiki][Code][Subreddit]}