Talk:Debate:Can science consider any aspect of human beings beyond the human body?

Without prejudice to the issue, I'd like to comment on some definitions being used. I won't debate anything here. This is the "pub" or "locker room" where the players talk to each other off-stage, okay?

proper object of scientific study	science can't, and shouldn't, study this
inside the realm of science	outside the realm of science
material world	spiritual world
something that can be quantified and measured	whatever cannot be quantified or measured

It seems, given the definitions above, that we have a circular definition. --Ed Poor ^Talk 14:09, 13 July 2007 (EDT)

The material/natural world includes things we can measure and quantify, and anything we can't is supernatural. It is circular in that it's a reflexive definition. The line between the two is necessarily porous as we discover new ways of observing things.

There's no "science shouldn't study the supernatural." You just can't make falsifiable claims about the supernatural, so science (which at its heart is the practice of confirming or denying predictions made by falsifiable claims) can't do anything with these unfalsifiable claims. AManInBlack 18:53, 20 July 2007 (EDT)