Random
Source Code
Random
Something evolutionists don't have
Christian man: bro, evolutionists got no evidence on they shit.
Person with iq: yeh ik
Take that you fucker who came up with the top def
Evidence-Based Spirituality, also known as Scientific Spirituality, Evidence-Based Spiritualism and Scientific Spiritualism, is a form of spirituality that seeks the development of a scientific approach on spirituality and the search for spiritual evidences for spirituality, it opposes the notion that evidences are only highly stringent, repeatable, double-blind, peer reviewed, materialism-compatible research, for all phenomena and it believes in "Different Methods for Different Domains" and in Epistemological Pluralism in order to study spiritual phenomena like Near-Death Experiences, Astral Projection, Mediumship, Out-of-body experiences, Spiritual phenomena, Spiritual experiences, spiritual healing, spirits, souls, consciousness, afterlife, extraphysics, extraphysical life, spiritual worlds, other dimensions and so on. Evidence-Based Spirituality also opposes the notions of scientism and neopositivism and it often uses the notions of extraphysicalism, extramaterialism, extranaturalism and spiritualicism for its studies and the separation of spiritual sciences from natural sciences where natural sciences cannot determine spiritual things and it's a thing that only spiritual sciences can actually determine.
"The notion of evidence-based spirituality might be really good in order to counter the material reductionism and the neopositivism inside the spiritual community and scientific community and the development of spiritual sciences and even lead into new discoveries related to spirituality and everything related to it."
In an argument, when one refuses to make a simple search for evidence of their claim; however, they demand that the opposition does so. This creates a paradoxical position in which their belief is true and, when confronted with facts, either remains true or is discovered to be false.
In the event that it is discovered to be false, a second paradox often occurs in which the claim remains true by way of continuing to state it despite the evidence.
"Nobody has proven me wrong yet. Give me a source, I admit defeat. Don't, I stay right! Of course, I can obviously google for myself... but I have Schrödinger's evidence on my side!"
a much needed verb version of evidence
where are you in your paragraph?
im evidating right now
The sort of evidence presented by a fickle person based on their hunch. The opposite of empirical evidence.
She only had whimpirical evidence why I shouldn't do it
compelling body of information or proof (resistant to facetious, punny answers involving actual "concrete") that causes one to believe that something is true
I demand concret evidence, and you better not send me photos of concrete this time.