I'm curious to know what the people participating in this forum think of the topic of spirituality. That term can be used in so many different ways as to render it virtually meaningless unless the person useing it defines what they're talking about clearly. By "spirituality," I don't mean religious dogma or religious practice. I don't mean new age woo woo. I don't mean the pseudoscience- dogma mix of many pre-scientific but non-theistic religions. I'm not talking about "the supernatural," or magical non-physical entities or forces, either. Finally, I'm not even talking about warm, fuzzy feelings-- though that is a dimension of spirituality that I think is worth considering.
Doesn't that leave out everything, then? No, the above doesn't exclude a search for meaning-- existential meaning-- searching for meaning in human existence or in one's life. Nor does it exclude attempts at transcendence of the ego, self-centered perception and self-centered behavior. (Practicing forgiveness, performing random acts of kindness, running a soup kitchen, volunteering in third world countries, studying Zen meditation, etc.)
In my experience, there will be people who read this and know what I'm talking about, but most of the individuals who read this will insist that there's nothing to spirituality EXCEPT dogma, nonsense, pseudoscience, and woo woo.
I'm writing this because I'd like to know how many people here know what I'm talking about, or are open-minded enough to want to know what I'm talking about. Essentially, I'm just doing a head count for kindred spirits. (Yes, there's the "s" word again. As I'm using it here, it's a metaphor.)
I remember vividly a day when a tougher cousin knocked me down in my backyard and chuckled and then had the audacity to put a foot to my cat later that afternoon....how i hated that fucker but could do little about it. And then the next day as he and his family walked out the door to leave and he jab stepped at the cat on the porch and the cat jumped away and he laughed, and the two or three seconds that are locked in my mind forever as that cat spun around and clawed up his back over his head down his face and shot off into the woods leaving that bastard screaming and dripping in blood.......
later that same tom-cat came back and stood over my head as I layed in the grass looking into the sky and lay next to me....buddies.
I lost a great deal of respect for humanity and gained a great deal for our fellows those few days, when I began to appreciate the very special bond that we had with other species. Other species. And now we find, as I have postulated many years earlier that animals raised together do not have such a blood thirsty need to kill their friends as we once thought. Animals must train their young to kill. Perhaps it is not instinct at all.
Spirituality, in my opinion, is simply another of humanites grandiose ideas that we are something great and special to the universe, when we, like our "friends" are simply nothing. Not the warm and fuzzy you want, but probably a little closer to the truth than you will ever prove.
We are indeed simply carbon based life forms on a mote of dust in a universe so vast our planet is 118/ the size of an atom to the universe as our planet is to it. Live well, it will be your only experience.
I think it's a word used by pseudo-intellectuals who want to sound smart without having to do any real learning.
QuoteIn my experience, there will be people who read this and know what I'm talking about
I think I know what you're talking about but I have trouble with the word spirituality as I have no supernatural beliefs of any kind.
I would say that I think some things are worth veneration. For example, a good friend of mine has been working for years running group homes for severely handicapped adults. These are adults who are often both very physically and mentally handicapped. It's hard to watch. Trust me when I say he doesn't do this for the money.
He leads a very selfless life and it does make me think about finding meaning in my life outside of my own desires. That's about as close as I get.
I have worked in a soup kitchen and I support a child overseas and make some donations because of theses thoughts... So is that humanistic spirituality?
I couldn't possibly know what you're talking about. I'm just a mere poor taker in a world of Mitt Romney's. I'm far to librral to know anything of the real world and actually have empathy for others.
No, sorry. I know EXACTLY the made up bullshit you're suggesting. You're suggesting you and you alone get "it" hoping one of us simple mother fuckers might glimpse a slice of the real meaning that you get.
Amiright?
I have mentioned experiences on here that I consider uplifting, as in elevating the senses to a different level. The problem with the word spiritual is that it is most often used in connection with religion, so using it in any other way tends to obscure the meaning.
Spiritual:
of, relating to, or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things.
The definition of the word in a non religious context is still a bit obscure.
Quote from: Kamonohashi on April 17, 2014, 09:40:07 PMDoesn't that leave out everything, then? No, the above doesn't exclude a search for meaning-- existential meaning-- searching for meaning in human existence or in one's life. Nor does it exclude attempts at transcendence of the ego, self-centered perception and self-centered behavior. (Practicing forgiveness, performing random acts of kindness, running a soup kitchen, volunteering in third world countries, studying Zen meditation, etc.)
Thinking about life and doing good things? That's your definition of spirituality? That's so deep, man. Soooo deep.
QuoteIn my experience, there will be people who read this and know what I'm talking about, but most of the individuals who read this will insist that there's nothing to spirituality EXCEPT dogma, nonsense, pseudoscience, and woo woo.
"I mean, most of you don't understand thinking about life and doing good things, but you know, maybe somebody out here is so in touch with their soul that they might just be able to understand things on such a spiritual level. Things like, like doing good things. Or, or maybe even thinking about life."
QuoteI'm writing this because I'd like to know how many people here know what I'm talking about, or are open-minded enough to want to know what I'm talking about. Essentially, I'm just doing a head count for kindred spirits. (Yes, there's the "s" word again. As I'm using it here, it's a metaphor.)
How much tie-die do you wear on a weekly basis?
Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on April 18, 2014, 01:41:11 AMI know EXACTLY the made up bullshit you're suggesting. You're suggesting you and you alone get "it" hoping one of us simple mother fuckers might glimpse a slice of the real meaning that you get. Amiright?
What I was referring to with regard to people understanding what I'm talking about wasn't an implication that I'm "enlightened" and was wondering whether or not there are any other "enlightened" people here-- but rather whether there was anyone who understood the sort of thing that I'm referring to. Obviously, there are.
Like it or not, the term "spirituality" is the only one commonly understood to address this notion of moral self improvement in the broader context of a search for meaning. When used in this manner, the root "spirit" in the term is a metaphorical mode of description which refers to subjective emotional states best described in terms of "light-heavy" or "free-gravity-bound" as opposed to purely qualitative emotions: "happy," "sad," "angry," etc. (This is that warm-fuzzy feeling that often comes from transcending one's evolutionarily-defined selfishness and egoic psychological instincts. It's the sense of "upliftedness, lightness, and internal soaring that a person might experience watching their child be born, or during moments of intimacy with another human being.)
Other words use this root in the same metaphorically descriptive way: inspirational, dispirited, awe-inspiring, in high spirits. Language is intrinsically metaphorical, although some people will interpret metaphors literally (like the Christian metaphors and symbolism in the story of Genesis). When I asked if there were any "kindred spirits" here, I wasn't inquiring about the existence of ghosts or goblins.
Quote from: Hijiri Byakuren on April 18, 2014, 12:27:54 AM
I think it's a word used by pseudo-intellectuals who want to sound smart without having to do any real learning.
I don't mean any criticism or hostility by what I'm about to say with regard to this response to my question. I'm simply using it as an example.
The reason why I phrased my original post the way I did is that I've brought up this idea of "spirituality" (sorry, but I've searched long and hard and there is no other word that captures what I'm trying to express)-- the reason that I asked if there was anyone who understood what I was talking about is that most atheists deny that "spirituality" can be anything but nonsense and woo woo-- regardless of how rationally and clearly I express my thoughts. This particular response is typical-- a perfect example. I don't mean to criticize it in any way; I'm only using it to demonstrate the difficulty I've had communicating in atheist forums. (I don't go to theist forums because I'm not a theist, and I don't go to new age forums, because they're full of GENUINE woo woo.)
I don't know what people mean by it, so I avoid making any claims about having it. To me, it's a meaningless word meant to denote something worthy that may not even exist.
Quote from: Kamonohashi on April 17, 2014, 09:40:07 PM
I'm curious to know what the people participating in this forum think of the topic of spirituality. That term can be used in so many different ways as to render it virtually meaningless unless the person useing it defines what they're talking about clearly. By "spirituality," I don't mean religious dogma or religious practice. I don't mean new age woo woo. I don't mean the pseudoscience- dogma mix of many pre-scientific but non-theistic religions. I'm not talking about "the supernatural," or magical non-physical entities or forces, either. Finally, I'm not even talking about warm, fuzzy feelings-- though that is a dimension of spirituality that I think is worth considering.
Doesn't that leave out everything, then? No, the above doesn't exclude a search for meaning-- existential meaning-- searching for meaning in human existence or in one's life. Nor does it exclude attempts at transcendence of the ego, self-centered perception and self-centered behavior. (Practicing forgiveness, performing random acts of kindness, running a soup kitchen, volunteering in third world countries, studying Zen meditation, etc.)
In my experience, there will be people who read this and know what I'm talking about, but most of the individuals who read this will insist that there's nothing to spirituality EXCEPT dogma, nonsense, pseudoscience, and woo woo.
I'm writing this because I'd like to know how many people here know what I'm talking about, or are open-minded enough to want to know what I'm talking about. Essentially, I'm just doing a head count for kindred spirits. (Yes, there's the "s" word again. As I'm using it here, it's a metaphor.)
I know what you mean, something lacking in most religious people. I think it is having gentle feelings like empathy, kindness, true courage, love, peace of mind, attachment to all living things, creativity instead of strong emotions like hate, revenge, fear, lust to destroy, prejudice, bigotry, ignorance, stupidity, etc. Solitary
Quote from: Kamonohashi on April 18, 2014, 12:50:59 PM
I don't mean to criticize it in any way; I'm only using it to demonstrate the difficulty I've had communicating in atheist forums. (I don't go to theist forums because I'm not a theist, and I don't go to new age forums, because they're full of GENUINE woo woo.)
It might help you to not bring the subject up in atheist forums, at least for a year or so. Of course, you will find some atheist somewhere that will claim to be a very spiritual person, because there is nothing to say an atheist can't believe in woo, while not believing in gods.
I took nothing you said as hostile. Rather, you seem in a state of disbelief. A good place to start understanding atheists is to believe what they say about themselves. Don't get too confounded by our different views. They are not complicated views. This isn't rocket science.
I have used the word spiritual on here in times past to describe experiences I have had in nature as a long time outdoorsman, because other words don't better describe the feeling. I don't use the word here anymore because to most it has a religious connotation.
It is just a fucking word. If somebody uses the word as an atheist it shouldn't set off a shitstorm of responses about, no, thats religion, blah blah. It is just meant to express an inner feeling, that is all.
One of the people whose writings I admire and who I respect for his views was John Muir. He used the word a lot to describe how nature affected him. It affects me the same way. Like I once said, there is nothing quite like sitting at a camp fire at dawn drinking a cup of freshly brewed coffee and watching the sun rise over a mountain lake, feeling the brush of a breeze with the scents of pine trees and flowers mingled in. Just because people haven't had experiences that elevate them above the ordinary and mundane, doesn't give someone the right to chastise them for how they describe it.
Several years after I'd accepted my atheism, I was sitting half way up a ridge by myself, looking down a dark blue mountain lake in a Montana wilderness area. As always, it was gorgeous, but I had one of those feelings that I get from time to time when I'm alone in the wilderness. I said to myself, actually I said it out loud to myself, "This is so beautiful; There has to be a god."
I suppose it was some sort of throwback to my days as a Christian, and my ability to logically process information was temporarily short circuited at that moment by overwhelming joy. In my defense, in less that two seconds, the fallacy of this non sequitur hit me, and I ended up chuckling to myself. :biggrin:
Quote from: SGOS on April 18, 2014, 02:13:39 PM
Several years after I'd accepted my atheism, I was sitting half way up a ridge by myself, looking down a dark blue mountain lake in a Montana wilderness area. As always, it was gorgeous, but I had one of those feelings that I get from time to time when I'm alone in the wilderness. I said to myself, actually I said it out loud to myself, "This is so beautiful; There has to be a god."
I suppose it was some sort of throwback to my days as a Christian, and my ability to logically process information was temporarily short circuited at that moment by overwhelming joy. In my defense, in less that two seconds, the fallacy of this non sequitur hit me, and I ended up chuckling to myself. :biggrin:
Cool, bro. I'm hoping to be in Montana this summer. Depending on my wife's mobility... Yeah, I know exactly what you mean. There are experiences outside yourself that are very hard to describe. I think that has something to do why people became religious in the first place, feeling exalted and uplifted without understanding the reasons why.
I consider myself as spiritual from time to time, which was something I never would have said as a Christian... so... eh.
I'm sure them there little pieces of metal hanging on string are spiritual when the wind makes em bang together. I can just feel the warm fuzzy feeling. No wait..it's the percocet. :lol:
Quote from: SGOS on April 18, 2014, 01:04:01 PM
...
Don't get too confounded by our different views. They are not complicated views. This isn't rocket science.
Well actually I am a rocket scientist
so my views might be complicated
I am also an atheist
ergo atheists' views are rocket science
(http://i326.photobucket.com/albums/k410/pioteir/memy-jpg_zpsbc9be2d3.jpg) (http://s326.photobucket.com/user/pioteir/media/memy-jpg_zpsbc9be2d3.jpg.html)
But seriously the way Kamo describes spirituality, everyone had one of those "searching for the meaning of life" thoughts. Every "what dafuq have I done with my life?" kind of question, every hungover "what happened last night?" falls into that category. No point in asking how many people had it.
Quote from: pioteir on April 18, 2014, 03:32:33 PM
Well actually I am a rocket scientist
so my views might be complicated
I am also an atheist
ergo atheists' views are rocket science
(http://i326.photobucket.com/albums/k410/pioteir/memy-jpg_zpsbc9be2d3.jpg) (http://s326.photobucket.com/user/pioteir/media/memy-jpg_zpsbc9be2d3.jpg.html)
But seriously the way Kamo describes spirituality, everyone had one of those "searching for the meaning of life" thoughts. Every "what dafuq have I done with my life?" kind of question, every hungover "what happened last night?" falls into that category. No point in asking how many people had it.
So is it OK if I casually say in conversation, "well, I know this Rocket Scientist....?
Quote from: stromboli on April 18, 2014, 02:18:55 PM
There are experiences outside yourself that are very hard to describe. I think that has something to do why people became religious in the first place, feeling exalted and uplifted without understanding the reasons why.
They are indeed powerful moments, so if you're looking for a sign from God and one of these hits, you're probably going to see it as the answer you are looking for. I can see how it could be compelling if you never had one before, or if you don't think about other reasons for the cause too much.
Quote from: stromboli on April 18, 2014, 05:28:56 PM
So is it OK if I casually say in conversation, "well, I know this Rocket Scientist....?
You're very welcome to do so :)
I think that it refers to the feeling of being in awe. A few years back I was visiting the Grand Canyon with my wife, and both of us were in awe with that landscape. Some people would fancy that as a "spiritual" experience. It isn't. Just glancing at the wonders of this universe gives you that feeling. It isn't magic. I'm sure it is has to do with certain chemicals that runs through your body, and gives you a wonderful feeling. Anyway that's my take on that.
Spirit grabbed an Opportunity to exercise its Curiosity on Mars.
Quote from: SGOS on April 18, 2014, 01:04:01 PM
I took nothing you said as hostile. Rather, you seem in a state of disbelief. A good place to start understanding atheists is to believe what they say about themselves. Don't get too confounded by our different views. They are not complicated views. This isn't rocket science.
Thank you for your considerate and thoughtful response to my post. I've been an atheist for most of my life-- for decades. While I was raised in a Catholic family and forced to attend weekly mass and go to Sunday school, my parents were agnostic. They believed that I'd grow up to be a baby-eating Satan worshiper if I didn't "have religion." (I did grow up that way, actually. I've been an atheist since I was old enough to officially reject the religion I was raised with.)
So, I'm not a reformed theist undergoing a transitional search for some sort of God, and spiri***uality for me has nothing to do with religion, new age pseudoscience, or belief in fairies. If you do a cross-cultural survey of world religions, religion substitutes (like the new age) and non-theistic cosmological philosophies (like Buddhist philosophy), the realm of spiri***uality pops up again and again and again. I wish to God ;-) there was a better word to refer to this topic-- one untainted by religious distortions. Unfortunately, as Sam Harris has pointed out, for most of the history of our species religion has had a monopoly on spiri***uality. Atheists attempting to address this dimension of human experience are forced to use the "s" word.
For me, it's like living in an alternate dimension in which the word "Heaven," was synonymous with "cosmology." It's quite frustrating.
Quote“Spirit†comes from the Latin word “to breath.†What we breathe is air, which is certainly matter, however thin. Despite usage to the contrary, there is no necessary implication in the word “spiritual†that we are talking of anything other than matter (including the matter of which the brain is made), or anything outside the realm of science. On occasion, I will feel free to use the word. Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality.
When we recognize our place in an immensity of light-years and in the passage of ages, when we grasp the intricacy, beauty, and subtlety of life, then that soaring feeling, that sense of elation and humility combined, is surely spiritual. So are our emotions in the presence of great art or music or literature, or of acts of exemplary selfless courage such as those of Mohandas Gandhi or Martin Luther King, Jr. The notion that science and spirituality are somehow mutually exclusive does a disservice to both.
A quote from Carl Sagan, from his book “Demon Haunted Worldâ€
Quote from: Kamonohashi on April 19, 2014, 10:36:13 AMUnfortunately, as Sam Harris has pointed out, for most of the history of our species religion has had a monopoly on spiri***uality. Atheists attempting to address this dimension of human experience are forced to use the "s" word.
But you're not. Simply describe what you're feeling/thinking and we can go from there.
By using the s-word and knowing full well its close association with religion (a really popular thing nowadays is to rebrand conventional religious ideas as "deep" spiritual experiences), you're incredibly likely to be confused with a woo-seller. So don't.
Quote from: pioteir on April 18, 2014, 03:32:33 PM
But seriously the way Kamo describes spirituality, everyone had one of those "searching for the meaning of life" thoughts. Every "what dafuq have I done with my life?" kind of question, every hungover "what happened last night?" falls into that category. No point in asking how many people had it.
A point of clarification. The original post wasn't asking how many people have experienced momentary "searching for the meaning of life" thoughts. I agree that we all have, and we have all had moments in our lives when we've transcended our egos and our self-oriented evolutionary programming. What the original post was attempting to ask was how many people recognize this dimension of existential human experience as a realm of existential human experience.
There actually are people who quit their jobs and go off to Japan to study zen, or join the Peace Corp, enter long-term psychoanalysis, or study astrophysics. Yes, I consider astrophysics to be one form of "spiritual path" if done in a certain way-- it is an engagement with the BIG existential questions, and if done right, moral and ethical questions as well. I just don't consider astrophysics to be the ONLY rational, scientific path in this realm of personal search for answers to existential questions.
What I'm saying is that, for some people (perhaps more "deep-minded," reflective, or thoughtful-- but certainly not better or wiser people) this realm of existential human experience is more than an occasional momentary thought or fleeting warm, fuzzy feeling.
Quote“Spirit†comes from the Latin word “to breath.†What we breathe is air, which is certainly matter, however thin. Despite usage to the contrary, there is no necessary implication in the word “spiritual†that we are talking of anything other than matter (including the matter of which the brain is made), or anything outside the realm of science. On occasion, I will feel free to use the word. Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality.
When we recognize our place in an immensity of light-years and in the passage of ages, when we grasp the intricacy, beauty, and subtlety of life, then that soaring feeling, that sense of elation and humility combined, is surely spiritual. So are our emotions in the presence of great art or music or literature, or of acts of exemplary selfless courage such as those of Mohandas Gandhi or Martin Luther King, Jr. The notion that science and spirituality are somehow mutually exclusive does a disservice to both.
If it's good enough for Carl Sagan it's good enough for me.
I see no need to seed some of our deepest emotional feelings to theists.
What tyhe fuck are you banging on about, Charley?
Quote from: Kamonohashi on April 19, 2014, 10:58:35 AM
What I'm saying is that, for some people (perhaps more "deep-minded," reflective, or thoughtful-- but certainly not better or wiser people) this realm of existential human experience is more than an occasional momentary thought or fleeting warm, fuzzy feeling.
Whatever rocks your boat, but get off your fucking high horse telling us what or what not to think about a nebulous thing like spirituality.
Quote from: josephpalazzo on April 19, 2014, 02:18:59 PM
Whatever rocks your boat, but get off your fucking high horse telling us what or what not to think about a nebulous thing like spirituality.
Yea, what he said!
You asked how many of us had a certain experience involving not-so-well-described set of emotions, but when I point out that everyone had some sort of this experience You ask us about, , some less deep than others, You get all deep-minded-reflectful-kind-of-people on my ass. If You don't like the answers don't ask the questions!
If You have a specific group of people in mind (deep minded or whatever) then say so at the stage of formulating Your question. You didn't do that so don't bitch about it later on.
Quote from: josephpalazzo on April 19, 2014, 02:18:59 PM
Whatever rocks your boat, but get off your fucking high horse telling us what or what not to think about a nebulous thing like spirituality.
Eating a dick would also be appropriate.
Quote from: Kamonohashi on April 19, 2014, 10:58:35 AMWhat the original post was attempting to ask was how many people recognize this dimension of existential human experience as a realm of existential human experience.
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/huh.gif)
Quote from: aitm on April 17, 2014, 10:16:34 PM
Spirituality, in my opinion, is simply another of humanity's grandiose ideas that we are something great and special to the universe, when we, like our "friends" are simply nothing. Not the warm and fuzzy you want, but probably a little closer to the truth than you will ever prove. We are indeed simply carbon based life forms on a mote of dust in a universe so vast our planet is 118/ the size of an atom to the universe as our planet is to it.
That is what spirituality for some people, to be sure, but not for everyone. I've studied the principles of Zen Buddhism for many years, because the intrinsic culture of Zen is empiricism and anti-dogmatism. A lot of practitioners accept the teachings of Zen on faith, but it is possible to base one's understanding and insight purely on reason, reflection, and empiricism. I reject faith axiomatically, but I don't need it to study Buddhism, and Buddhism is only one of many different paths that I have taken towards self-understanding and understanding of the world around me.
Zen enlightenment is all about coming to realize that we aren't infinitesimal motes of dust in a vast universe, but the universe itself. The Vietnamese Zen master Thich Nhat Hanh once wrote a book called "The Sun, My Heart" exploring the fact that, if the Sun were to suddenly burn out, a few days later everything on Earth would be dead. If you can no more exist without the Sun then without your liver or spleen, how can you meaningfully claim it to be a part of your "environment" rather than yourself? The air and water and plants and animals, without which we would quickly die, are also parts of "our environment." In truth, a human being isn't an independent, autonomous "object," but a continuously changing vortex, sucking in air, food, and information and spewing out waste products, heat, and information.
We are vortices which, as the atheistic spiritual teacher Alan Watts used to point out, have grown out of the Earth as apples grow out of an apple tree. The Earth grew out of interstellar dust, and that dust grew out of other stars, ultimately leading all the way back to the Big Bang. Our species grew out of earlier species, with no clear boundaries between each other than the capacity to interbreed, going all the way back to abiogenesis. Modern physics has proven that not only are matter and energy aspects of the same thing, so are time and space. So are matter and so called "empty space." The recent discovery of the Higgs Boson has verified the fact that the very "stuffness" of subatomic particles (which are actually waves in the fabric of space-time, not "objects") is derived from the so called "empty space (the Higgs field) through which they more.
Yes, to say that everything is interconnected and "I am the universe" sounds like new agey woo woo, but it's an empirical fact. Attaining that sort of paradigm shift is one facet of "spiritual searching" and "spiritual learning." It can lead to warm, fuzzy feelings, but I don't consider warm, fuzzy feelings to be very important compared to deep understanding about what I am, where I am, and why I am. You can call all this something other than "spirituality" of course, but the historical and linguistic reality is that the term most commonly used to describe this intellectual realm is "spirituality."
Quote from: Berati on April 18, 2014, 01:19:19 AM
I think I know what you're talking about but I have trouble with the word spirituality as I have no supernatural beliefs of any kind.
I have worked in a soup kitchen and I support a child overseas and make some donations because of theses thoughts... So is that humanistic spirituality?
Absolutely. I would definitely call that humanistic spirituality. One certainly doesn't need to use the "s" word, but I've searched high and low and have yet to find a more practically useful/applicable term in the English language.
The words "spirit" and "inspiration" can be interpreted in different ways. Christians in the United States tend to be very fundamentalist, and interpret the bible in insanely literal ways. Interpreted metaphorically, as symbolic mythology and folklore, one can find a great deal of wisdom in the story of Genesis. The so-called "fall of man" describes how our hominid ancestors "ate from the Tree of Knowledge" and, in so doing, not only kicked themselves out of the blissful ignorance of Eden (which all the other animals still enjoyed) but were also forced to face the inevitability of their own morality (unlike the other creatures of Eden). Taken as literature, as mythology, there's nothing wrong with bible stories. Interpreting EVERYTHING literally is just stupid. Stupid. Like I'm going to go to my corner grocer and say, "Hey, Joe, give me a pound of bananas and a half pound of the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge. Oh, and those grapefruits look good, too."
Quote from: Hydra009 on April 19, 2014, 11:55:50 PM
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/huh.gif)
(Love that clip.) The original post was essentially asking how many people recognize a spade as a spade, instead of denying that it is a spade or insisting that it is whatever it happens to reminds them of.
Look, I'm an atheist, so I think like an atheist. But I wasn't mentally abused as a child. My parents were agnostic so I wasn't brain raped by the adults upon whom I was dependent and whom I trusted. Consequently, I don't have a painful, angry visceral reaction to words which are often bandied about and twisted and distorted and used as instruments of kiddie brainwashing by theists. I can call a spade a spade. I don't have to insist that it's intrinsically a weapon of torture and abuse just because spades have been known to be used to inflict harm on others.
Quote from: pioteir on April 19, 2014, 04:21:08 PM
Yea, what he said!
You asked how many of us had a certain experience involving not-so-well-described set of emotions, but when I point out that everyone had some sort of this experience You ask us about, some less deep than others, You get all deep-minded-reflectful-kind-of-people on my ass. If You don't like the answers don't ask the questions!
If You have a specific group of people in mind (deep minded or whatever) then say so at the stage of formulating Your question. You didn't do that so don't bitch about it later on.
I'm sorry, I don't understand. I said, "Yeah, well, maybe people who not only have an occasion thought of this sort but actually devote a substantial amount of time and effort to exploring such thoughts and trying to learn more on the topic and existential/moral questions might possibly be more reflective or deep-minded, but they certainly aren't better or wiser. That's what I said, essentially, but you're hearing it as "I'm so much better than you losers!"
You've misheard me. Honestly. I wasn't saying that. The point I was trying to make was that, for some atheists, this realm of intellectual, existential exploration and learning is worthwhile enough to devote substantial time and effort to. If in hearing this you feel insulted, because when you've had such thoughts you considered them for a few minutes and then forgot about them-- if you feel insulted because that sounds like people are saying that they're better than you, then you've interpreted what you're hearing.
I've had thoughts about going to the gym and working out three or four times a week to get really buff. I haven't followed up on that, but I know some people have done more than I have to get in shape and keep in shape. Does that make me a "fat, lazy pathetic loser"? Does that make the people who seem to feel motivated to stay in shape better than me? If they make a post saying, "Anybody here want to go to the gym on Saturday to work out?" should I take that to mean that they think they're better than me since I'm not motivated to go to the gym?
The reason the original post was worded in the way that it was-- the reason I said that most people here won't understand what I'm talking about but I'm curious to know if there are any who do-- is that I've posted this sort of inquiry on atheist forums before and 95 percent of the responses were people jumping down my throat telling me that there's nothing to spirituality but dogma, woo woo, and stupidity.
I know that not all atheists believe that, but I also know that many do. I'm not saying that the ones who don't are intrinsically better, and I understand that many people here have been hurt by theists, taken advantage of and lied to by theists since early childhood. I understand that a lot of the reaction to "spirituality" on this forum isn't due to people being shallow or amoral, but rather to the fact that spirituality and religion are so closely intertwined in many people's experience, and they have been hurt by religious people and religion.
I get that, but I don't have the same personal background, so I don't have the same visceral affective reaction to the term or to the concept. That doesn't mean that I'm better.
Hey, if you're just angry, that's okay. Most likely, no matter what I say it's going to evoke an angry reaction in you. What I just said probably came across as patronizing rather than compassionate. That's okay, too. But I really don't mean any harm.
Quote from: Kamonohashi on April 20, 2014, 12:11:21 AM
That is what spirituality for some people, to be sure, but not for everyone. I've studied the principles of Zen Buddhism for many years, because the intrinsic culture of Zen is empiricism and anti-dogmatism. A lot of practitioners accept the teachings of Zen on faith, but it is possible to base one's understanding and insight purely on reason, reflection, and empiricism. I reject faith axiomatically, but I don't need it to study Buddhism, and Buddhism is only one of many different paths that I have taken towards self-understanding and understanding of the world around me.
Zen enlightenment is all about coming to realize that we aren't infinitesimal motes of dust in a vast universe, but the universe itself. The Vietnamese Zen master Thich Nhat Hanh once wrote a book called "The Sun, My Heart" exploring the fact that, if the Sun were to suddenly burn out, a few days later everything on Earth would be dead. If you can no more exist without the Sun then without your liver or spleen, how can you meaningfully claim it to be a part of your "environment" rather than yourself? The air and water and plants and animals, without which we would quickly die, are also parts of "our environment." In truth, a human being isn't an independent, autonomous "object," but a continuously changing vortex, sucking in air, food, and information and spewing out waste products, heat, and information.
We are vortices which, as the atheistic spiritual teacher Alan Watts used to point out, have grown out of the Earth as apples grow out of an apple tree. The Earth grew out of interstellar dust, and that dust grew out of other stars, ultimately leading all the way back to the Big Bang. Our species grew out of earlier species, with no clear boundaries between each other than the capacity to interbreed, going all the way back to abiogenesis. Modern physics has proven that not only are matter and energy aspects of the same thing, so are time and space. So are matter and so called "empty space." The recent discovery of the Higgs Boson has verified the fact that the very "stuffness" of subatomic particles (which are actually waves in the fabric of space-time, not "objects") is derived from the so called "empty space (the Higgs field) through which they more.
Yes, to say that everything is interconnected and "I am the universe" sounds like new agey woo woo, but it's an empirical fact. Attaining that sort of paradigm shift is one facet of "spiritual searching" and "spiritual learning." It can lead to warm, fuzzy feelings, but I don't consider warm, fuzzy feelings to be very important compared to deep understanding about what I am, where I am, and why I am. You can call all this something other than "spirituality" of course, but the historical and linguistic reality is that the term most commonly used to describe this intellectual realm is "spirituality."
Absolutely!
Spirituality does not require a belief in god. It only requires a devotion to growing in understanding about oneself and others, and bettering oneself and others. The realization that ultimately we are not separate but "are all one" is the basis of morality in my point of view. That inner understanding of what is right and wrong comes from this deep knowledge buried deep within that what you are doing to another you are doing to another yourself.
None of this requires a belief in "god". It is the traditional dogmatic religion of the masses that prioritizes "belief" over all else, not spirituality.
Quote from: Kamonohashi on April 20, 2014, 12:38:08 AM
(Love that clip.) The original post was essentially asking how many people recognize a spade as a spade, instead of denying that it is a spade or insisting that it is whatever it happens to reminds them of.
Look, I'm an atheist, so I think like an atheist. But I wasn't mentally abused as a child. My parents were agnostic so I wasn't brain raped by the adults upon whom I was dependent and whom I trusted. Consequently, I don't have a painful, angry visceral reaction to words which are often bandied about and twisted and distorted and used as instruments of kiddie brainwashing by theists. I can call a spade a spade. I don't have to insist that it's intrinsically a weapon of torture and abuse just because spades have been known to be used to inflict harm on others.
So...people are either on board with your whole "realm of existential human experience" thing (whatever that means) or they're dishonest and/or irrationally hateful of religion (apparently, because they've been hurt by it)? That doesn't sound like much of a choice.
Like other people have been saying, whatever floats your boat, but I'm not endorsing anything nor asserting the existence of anything beyond the material. Of course, I do sympathize to some degree with a focus on the "big" questions and the search for meaning and "transcendence of the ego" and yadda yadda, but let's not make the mistake of contemplating our navels or allowing one's sense of "warm fuzzies" to override rationalism.
Quote from: Kamonohashi on April 17, 2014, 09:40:07 PM
I'm curious to know what the people participating in this forum think of the topic of spirituality. That term can be used in so many different ways as to render it virtually meaningless unless the person useing it defines what they're talking about clearly. By "spirituality," I don't mean religious dogma or religious practice. I don't mean new age woo woo. I don't mean the pseudoscience- dogma mix of many pre-scientific but non-theistic religions. I'm not talking about "the supernatural," or magical non-physical entities or forces, either. Finally, I'm not even talking about warm, fuzzy feelings-- though that is a dimension of spirituality that I think is worth considering.
Doesn't that leave out everything, then? No, the above doesn't exclude a search for meaning-- existential meaning-- searching for meaning in human existence or in one's life.
Tread very carefully. If you are speaking about any kind of any kind of ultimate meaning of existence -
that is woo woo! That implies a some kind of theism, and there would need to be some mind or design forcing this meaning onto us. Woo of the worst kind.
If you are simply speaking of finding meaning for your own life. I.e. there is no purpose outside yourself, but you can make one for yourself. That's perfectly fine. In fact if you define "spirit" as your own "spirit" in the poetic sense rather than the religious/magical one, I'd accept this definition of spirituality as sensible. I'd advice against using the word as no one knows what it means though. You'd have to go on a long, explanatory lecture to inform everyone you're talking to specifically what you mean, otherwise they will get confused as hell, mix it up with what they would call spirituality, etc.
QuoteNor does it exclude attempts at transcendence of the ego, self-centered perception and self-centered behavior.
Nothing wrong with that.
QuotePracticing forgiveness, performing random acts of kindness, running a soup kitchen, volunteering in third world countries
None of this has necessarily anything to do with your definition of spirituality. You don't need to try to find meaning for your life to do any of this, one can simply be a very good and caring person. But of course, in your quest for transcending the ego, which you seem to label part of finding purpose and meaning, these things can be utilized. As they'd be done for you to reach a goal they might not be labelled as selfless however and could easily be labelled self-centered.
Quote from: Kamonohashi on April 20, 2014, 12:11:21 AM
That is what spirituality for some people, to be sure, but not for everyone. I've studied the principles of Zen Buddhism for many years, because the intrinsic culture of Zen is empiricism and anti-dogmatism. A lot of practitioners accept the teachings of Zen on faith, but it is possible to base one's understanding and insight purely on reason, reflection, and empiricism. I reject faith axiomatically, but I don't need it to study Buddhism, and Buddhism is only one of many different paths that I have taken towards self-understanding and understanding of the world around me.
Zen enlightenment is all about coming to realize that we aren't infinitesimal motes of dust in a vast universe, but the universe itself. The Vietnamese Zen master Thich Nhat Hanh once wrote a book called "The Sun, My Heart" exploring the fact that, if the Sun were to suddenly burn out, a few days later everything on Earth would be dead. If you can no more exist without the Sun then without your liver or spleen, how can you meaningfully claim it to be a part of your "environment" rather than yourself? The air and water and plants and animals, without which we would quickly die, are also parts of "our environment." In truth, a human being isn't an independent, autonomous "object," but a continuously changing vortex, sucking in air, food, and information and spewing out waste products, heat, and information.
We are vortices which, as the atheistic spiritual teacher Alan Watts used to point out, have grown out of the Earth as apples grow out of an apple tree. The Earth grew out of interstellar dust, and that dust grew out of other stars, ultimately leading all the way back to the Big Bang. Our species grew out of earlier species, with no clear boundaries between each other than the capacity to interbreed, going all the way back to abiogenesis. Modern physics has proven that not only are matter and energy aspects of the same thing, so are time and space. So are matter and so called "empty space." The recent discovery of the Higgs Boson has verified the fact that the very "stuffness" of subatomic particles (which are actually waves in the fabric of space-time, not "objects") is derived from the so called "empty space (the Higgs field) through which they more.
Yes, to say that everything is interconnected and "I am the universe" sounds like new agey woo woo, but it's an empirical fact. Attaining that sort of paradigm shift is one facet of "spiritual searching" and "spiritual learning." It can lead to warm, fuzzy feelings, but I don't consider warm, fuzzy feelings to be very important compared to deep understanding about what I am, where I am, and why I am. You can call all this something other than "spirituality" of course, but the historical and linguistic reality is that the term most commonly used to describe this intellectual realm is "spirituality."
it took you four paragraphs to somewhat come to the same conclusion I did in one. Except for the part of human arrogance that suggests we "are something". You don't have to agree, but I am quite assured that the universe no more recognizes you than it does our entire galaxy. And if in an instant every particle of matter that is of our galaxy disappeared, the universe would not notice, care or be affected. Such is the size of the universe, and to proclaim otherwise is to also suggest that should you lost a single atom from the bottom of your foot, you would notice. I am equally assured, you would not.
Quote from: Kamonohashi on April 20, 2014, 12:11:21 AM
That is what spirituality for some people, to be sure, but not for everyone. I've studied the principles of Zen Buddhism for many years, because the intrinsic culture of Zen is empiricism and anti-dogmatism. A lot of practitioners accept the teachings of Zen on faith, but it is possible to base one's understanding and insight purely on reason, reflection, and empiricism. I reject faith axiomatically, but I don't need it to study Buddhism, and Buddhism is only one of many different paths that I have taken towards self-understanding and understanding of the world around me.
Zen enlightenment is all about coming to realize that we aren't infinitesimal motes of dust in a vast universe, but the universe itself. The Vietnamese Zen master Thich Nhat Hanh once wrote a book called "The Sun, My Heart" exploring the fact that, if the Sun were to suddenly burn out, a few days later everything on Earth would be dead. If you can no more exist without the Sun then without your liver or spleen, how can you meaningfully claim it to be a part of your "environment" rather than yourself? The air and water and plants and animals, without which we would quickly die, are also parts of "our environment." In truth, a human being isn't an independent, autonomous "object," but a continuously changing vortex, sucking in air, food, and information and spewing out waste products, heat, and information.
We are vortices which, as the atheistic spiritual teacher Alan Watts used to point out, have grown out of the Earth as apples grow out of an apple tree. The Earth grew out of interstellar dust, and that dust grew out of other stars, ultimately leading all the way back to the Big Bang. Our species grew out of earlier species, with no clear boundaries between each other than the capacity to interbreed, going all the way back to abiogenesis. Modern physics has proven that not only are matter and energy aspects of the same thing, so are time and space. So are matter and so called "empty space." The recent discovery of the Higgs Boson has verified the fact that the very "stuffness" of subatomic particles (which are actually waves in the fabric of space-time, not "objects") is derived from the so called "empty space (the Higgs field) through which they more.
Yes, to say that everything is interconnected and "I am the universe" sounds like new agey woo woo, but it's an empirical fact. Attaining that sort of paradigm shift is one facet of "spiritual searching" and "spiritual learning." It can lead to warm, fuzzy feelings, but I don't consider warm, fuzzy feelings to be very important compared to deep understanding about what I am, where I am, and why I am. You can call all this something other than "spirituality" of course, but the historical and linguistic reality is that the term most commonly used to describe this intellectual realm is "spirituality."
Ok, now you are starting to make dogmatic claims of truth without backing these statements up with evidence. You say you reject faith, but how have you come to the position that "In truth, a human being isn't an independent, autonomous "object," but a continuously changing vortex, sucking in air, food, and information and spewing out waste products, heat, and information." Nothing you say back this up. This is all woo. All made up fairytales to make you feel better about your own existence. Empty space, etc. has nothing to do with any of this, and you sound just like Casparov and other theists trying to find anything that sounds scientific you can cling to in order for your own view to make sense.
I am NOT the universe. You are NOT the universe. We are part of the universe, but that is it. We will die, and then we are no more. Our minds, all we are, can be demonstrated to be reactions created by our brains. It's cause and effect. When we die we are death. The matter and energy that was part of us will be redistributed, but we, ourselves will not. Our brain activity is gone. The memories, etc. that made up who we are, and the brain that hosted them, will rot. I'm sorry if this sounds unpleasant, but it is true. Backed up by everything we know about the brain.