Changes

Believers respond to the many instances of supernaturalization by arguing that the fact that supernaturalization often occurs does not refute the existence of the supernatural any more than the fact that scientists often make errors refutes the existence of the natural universe; and that the supernatural by its very nature cannot be explored through science, and must therefore be explored through different means, such as [[spirituality]].  Nonbelievers counter that the two forms of explanation cannot be equated, because erroneous naturalistic claims, such as those made for the existence of [[phlogiston]] or [[N-rays]], are routinely and often rapidly corrected by reference to nature, while erroneous supernaturalistic claims such as the above are impossible to correct by reference to supernature or by any other widely accepted objective means.

Believers respond to the many instances of supernaturalization by arguing that the fact that supernaturalization often occurs does not refute the existence of the supernatural any more than the fact that scientists often make errors refutes the existence of the natural universe; and that the supernatural by its very nature cannot be explored through science, and must therefore be explored through different means, such as [[spirituality]].  Nonbelievers counter that the two forms of explanation cannot be equated, because erroneous naturalistic claims, such as those made for the existence of [[phlogiston]] or [[N-rays]], are routinely and often rapidly corrected by reference to nature, while erroneous supernaturalistic claims such as the above are impossible to correct by reference to supernature or by any other widely accepted objective means.

And then there are the practical considerations. Explanations based on supernatural constructs have consistently been found to be no better than no explanation at all at predicting outcomes before the fact.{{Fact|date=April 2007}} Simply on the basis of choosing which explanations work best at not only accounting for reality but predicting it before the fact, natural explanations are to be preferred.{{Fact|date=April 2007}}

And then there are the practical considerations. Explanations based on supernatural constructs have consistently been found to be no better than no explanation at all at predicting outcomes before the fact. Simply on the basis of choosing which explanations work best at not only accounting for reality but predicting it before the fact, natural explanations are to be preferred.

==Supernatural in Fiction==

==Supernatural in Fiction==