And this is central imo. I am torn between dismissing the paranormal as the product of a psychological predilection (essentially a quirk of wiring) and an actual phenomenon that, for as yet undetermined reasons, is rare and not consistent by/with our current mechanist paradigm.
Anything neither reproducible nor consistent by current method.
People whom i trust have had experiences that are beyond any sort of explanation by randomness. But the subjective "bearing of witness" makes these accounts scientifically inadmissible. I do however have an expectation that, if they are real, we'll eventually develop a method to look into them. Our physical science is really only about three centuries old. our viewpoint is essentially medieval in both heritage and form. I wonder what the frontiers of physics will look like in a millennium, presuming of course we don't live A Canticle for Leibowitz.
