is what you get? Or do you allow for explanations of the universe that suppose that another entity with powers that exceed human abilities is present and active? Ever

since Sir Isaac Newton’s invention and explanation of the scientific method, which supposes that only empirical evidence is to be considered, scientists have gathered

data and have tried to determine what it might mean. But are all things discoverable only things empirically determined? Some would say no. In Aristotle’s day, there

were at least two opposing cosmologies. The first, espoused by the Sophics, eliminated the superhuman or supernatural explanations of phenomena, and instead they

viewed the world as though only by their own wits. The opposing view was that of the Mantics. A Mantic invited the superhuman and supernatural as explanations of

phenomena, and yet not exclusively so. What aggravated the Sophic was the Mantic’s willingness to accept the lack of a concrete, quantifiable, and sensed answer to a

puzzling question. For example, the Mantics might credit a god for making things happen on the Earth. A Sophic looked for answers that made sense, as observed and

described by their senses. The late Carl Sagan would have been a Sophic. His thoughts in this regard can be found in The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in

the Dark (published in 1995). As he would put it, if one wondered why a brain and the visual sense could suIDenly perceive a phenomenon, as in a vision, he would look

to how the brain functions for an answer, not for some exterior, metaphysical answer. How do you determine truth? What is your cosmological starting point? Are all

your inquiries empirically determined, or do you leave room for explanations that exceed human abilities? If you looked up the reference to Hammurabi’s Code, you would

have seen how careful he was to include deities and important persons of the day in the preamble to his now famous code of laws. He didn’t credit himself for coming up

with the legal way forward that we in the West are all too quick to give credit; but shared credit with persons he would never

see through human eyes, but which could be imagined by his mind. And it appears that this was a common practice in the ancient world. The Mantic cosmology has been an

important part of human thinking, or perhaps better put, perceiving. You can see its influence in our Declaration of Independence.
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the

powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires

that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

There is a marriage between laws of nature, which could be empirically determined, and [laws] of nature’s God, which one might presume to be determined

metaphysically. The Greeks distinguished between physes (nature) and nomos (law), as we do today. We mustn’t overlook, in our modern understanding of the

industrialized world, the time when life was less technology and mostly what-you-see-is-what-get. Indigenous persons on every continent were a part of nature, not

apart from nature. Daylight, darkness, hail, rain, snow, floods, drought, wild fires, thunder and lightning, tornados, earthquakes, volcano eruptions, mountains,

valleys, wildlife, trees, oceans, lakes, sun, moon, and stars all played into the techno-color and surround sound world of primitive and ancient humans. In some ways,

primitive humans were the most empirical creatures walking upright. And yet in other ways they became more and more spiritual, when what was sensed made no sense at

all.

Activity
Ponder the following questions and engage your professor in discussion. How does one explain all of what can be seen? Did it all just appear? If that were so, then no

one seems to know anyone to whom it appeared. Was it made? If that were so, this too fails to yield one, human witness. Unexplainable occurrences, like illness from

diseases or infection, or deformities from birth, how would these be explained by the first ones? Did