I haven't spent a lot of time in my life pondering the deeper meaning of woo-woo, but the word has come up on this blog recently, so I might as well dive into the murky woo-woo waters. Let's begin with a Google AI definition.
Today regular commenter Appreciative Reader, who isn't a fan of woo-woo (to put it mildly), left this response to a mention of "true woo" by another commenter.
"true woo"
No such thing, Umami. Such of "it" as is true, isn't woo at all, and needs no dodgy defense employing dodgy means by dodgy woo-peddlers. And such of "it" as is true, is ultimately validated by science (witness the core of Buddhism vis-a-vis the core of Christianity).
Sorry, that was going to town beating down a stray throw-away comment, but I believe that's an important point, one completely apposite to what this place is about, and you I believe are one of the few people remaining with whom discussing this won't be a complete waste of one's time.
Science isn't necessarily about materialism. It is about empiricism and rationality. It is just that materialism is what it has yielded so far: so it is reasonable, so far, to subscribe to materialism. There is no reason why real ghosts (whence the actual woo-woo music that gives us that cool descriptor), should they really exist, should not be fully amenable to study via the methods of empiricism and rationality, aka science.
Woo is woo, all fake. It is what charlatans peddle, and gullible fools fall for.
I think Appreciative Reader makes a strong case here. One of my favorite putdowns of unfounded supernatural assertions is that they lack demonstrable evidence.
Sometimes I wonder whether that word "demonstrable" is needed. Wouldn't "evidence" be enough? No, is the conclusion I keep returning to. The reason is that there's plenty of evidence in favor of God, angels, heaven, miracles, and such. But that evidence is always hidden away within the minds of people who believe in supernatural entities and events.
Books abound about the supernatural. Web sites abound about the supernatural. Personal experiential accounts abound about the supernatural. Problem is, there's no demonstrable evidence about the supernatural, evidence that can be assessed, inspected, and critiqued by other people.
So it's entirely appropriate to call all claims about supernatural stuff to be woo-woo.
Though believers in God and realms of reality beyond the physical may dislike that term, I encourage them to substitute "lacking demonstrable evidence" or "unproven scientifically" for "woo-woo" in their own minds if the word bothers them.
As Appreciative Reader correctly pointed out, science isn't inherently materialistic. Rather, it is inherently based on demonstrable evidence.
If some supernatural phenomenon was accompanied by demonstrable evidence (for example, God proclaiming "let there be two moons," and suddenly there is another copy of the moon orbiting earth with predictable tidal effects), it would fall within the domain of science.
Meaning, science would need to expand its boundaries to embrace the now-proven supernatural phenomenon -- which wouldn't be woo-woo, but a new fact about reality.
Now, I understand the reasonable argument that asking for physical evidence of a supernatural entity is like a fish living in the ocean depths asking for evidence be presented to it of dry land. It just isn't possible. I've made that argument myself in my religious-believing days.
It's a decent argument, for it might be the case that some people are able to experience a supernatural side of reality that most people are closed off from. They could have a vision of God, or whatever, and tell others about that vision, yet be unable to present any demonstrable evidence of the vision.
Dreams are like this. We can have a memorable dream, describe it to a friend, and have to trust that they believe we're accurately describing our nighttime experience. Similarly, there could be supernatural phenomena experienced by some people that have to be taken on faith by others.
Which would put the phenomena in the category of woo-woo, because there is no way to distinguish between a private experience of an actual objective reality, and a private experience of a fantasized subjective reality.
Once woo-woo is transformed into fact through the alchemy of demonstrable evidence, it stops being woo-woo and starts being a scientific truth. This is why all woo-woo is based on faith. If woo-woo is based on demonstrable evidence, it no longer is woo-woo.
Recent Comments