"The dictionaries define ‘house’ as a ‘building for human habitation or occupation’, etc. Let us imagine that we buy a house; this buying is an extensional activity, usually with some consequences. If we orient ourselves by intension we are really buying a definition, although we may even inspect the house, which may appear desirable, etc. Then suppose we move into the house with our furniture and the whole house collapses because termites have destroyed all the wood leaving only a shell, perhaps satisfying to the eye. Does the verbal definition of the house correspond to the extensional facts? Of course not. It becomes obvious then by intension the term ‘house’ was over-defined, or over-limited, while by extension, or actual facts, it was hopelessly under-defined, as many important characteristics were left out. In no dictionary definition of a ‘house’ is the possibility of termites mentioned."

"In science and particularly mathematics we usually try to make assumptions conscious. Not so in life, often with said consequences, except perhaps when we undergo psychotherapy and become conscious of our assumptions. Here we could make a broad generalization that the advance of science and its human value is based, among others, on making unconscious assumptions conscious. It may be said also that most of psychotherapy depends on the same process, thus linking science and sanity. It has not been suspected that the structure of our language also automatically involves silent assumptions which work through the process of implications. Thus, if we use a language of elementalistic structure such as ‘space’ and ‘time’, ‘body’ and ‘mind’, ‘emotion’ and ‘intellect’, the silent assumptions are that these ‘entities’ can be divided, which is false to facts, as there are no such entities taken separately, and the split remains only verbal. A cat without a body should appear only to an Alice and only in Wonderland."

"The word ‘supernatural’ is by definition an incoherent concept and thus a meaningless word, for its’ phenomenal occurrence from an observational perspective is indistinguishable from a phenomenal occurrence that is permitted to occur given certain conditions— from following particular rules or natural laws. A ‘supernatural’ event is also by definition, an ‘event that breaks laws of nature’. Therefore, asserting an event as ‘supernatural’ requires the assumption that ‘all’ natural laws are thoroughly known in order to meaningfully discern a violation. Hearing a friend’s voice over a cell phone would be denoted as ‘supernatural’ by a ‘primitive’ islander who has never experience and thus couldn’t possibly imagine such ‘magic’ because this ‘violates’ the laws of nature as he or she understands them ‘to be’, but to a ‘modern’ day human, consistent with the governing principles of nature.

Elbert Hubbard, with respect to this consideration, mockingly clarifies this point with the following quote: ‘The supernatural is the natural not yet understood.’ Hence, those who claim occurrences as ‘supernatural’ are merely affirming and indicating their superficial, ignorant and incoherent ‘understanding’ of these natural occurrences by means of meaninglessly denying existence of the very methodical or systematic cognitive element that allows these individuals to asses such ‘supernatural’ occurrences to begin with at any level. It should consequently be apparent how the denying of this element can preclude the possibility of deeper inquiry of such phenomena."

"The old word “metaphysics” is an illegitimate child of ignorance
and an unnecessary word in the scientific study of nature. Every phenomenon of nature can be classed and studied in physics or chemistry or mathematics; the problem, therefore, is not in any way supernatural or superphysical, but belongs rather to an unknown or an undeveloped branch of physics. The problem, therefore, may be not that of some new science, but rather that of a new branch of mathematics, or physics, or chemistry, etc., or all combined."

"Although we have the illusion of receiving high-resolution images from our eyes, what the optic nerve actually sends to the brain is just outlines and clues about points of interest in our visual field. We then essentially hallucinate the world from cortical memories that interpret a series of extremely low-resolution movies that arrive in parallel channels."