Do you consider yourself spiritual?

Igopogo said:
Yes, I agree, but there's a different aspect of emotion that I'm getting at, (which is what I'm referring to with emotions and facts in 'proper balance'. Sometimes what we would describe as brilliant 'science' is nothing of the sort, but a meandering speculation around the facts we perceive. It's a creative, inventive venture, that if you remove the human emotion quotient entirely from the equation, these discoveries would be impossible.
Click to expand...
No doubt that human emotions, as well as a number of other thought processes lead to scientific discoveries. We have to think of a hypothesis before we can test it. But thinking of these things is not really a part of the scientific process. Conspiracy theorists can think of things. Lunatics can think of things. (but I repeat myself). It is the testing that makes it science, and that must be done without emotion.

Igopogo said:
BTW, I miss ol' Walt too, especially in US election years.
Click to expand...
He was a bloody genius. I was a kid when I first started reading his stuff. I didn't "get it" of course, but by reading it, I became the political animal I am. He probably helped turn me into a liberal too. I don't know whether to thank or curse him for that.
 
Value relevance:

Good post: You received direct gnosis via a chemical catalyst that allowed you to made "that ancient heavenly connection to the starry dynamo in the machinery of night.."

You are a lucky man!
 
Tricky said:
I think it is equally important not to accept the fools' terms. Spiritual at some level must involve spirits. It is the root of the word. If you say "yes, so long as you accept that spirits don't actually have to be spirits" then you are simply accepting their rules. I think this is wrong. Let THEM define what they mean by spiritual, and then you can say whether or not you agree that what you believe is aligned with those definitions.
Click to expand...


Damn you!

I have to agree. I'm not spiritual, not in any sense that a person asking such a question would understand.

There are no spirits, and I shouldn't walk into the trap that is waiting for me.

I still like sunsets and think that much of the universe is beautiful, but that has nothing to do with spirit and is actually only in my head.
 
Certain human accomplishments (music, art, literature) give me a sense of euphoria....I think many elements of nature and the universe are both logical and beautiful....but if the definition of Spiritual includes the belief in spirits, then I'd say no. Of course, the definition of a word can evolve almost every day, and have have different meaning to each person.
 
fishbait said:
Nope. And I get really annoyed with people who say "I'm not religious, I'm spiritual." When sincerely asked to explain what they mean, it is obvious they don't even know what they believe. ...
Click to expand...

Pet peeve of mine too.

Religion + consumerism = spirituality?

"Pop animism". The invisible hand of the "pulp-it": no brain (animus), just mindless appetite (anima). Spirituality is religion reduced to consumer impulse.

Now in a way, that's good. What more does religion need to say, really, than "be nice!" and "hey, it'll be ok". What do all the totems and taboos add, except reasons to distrust those with different t&t?

But -- it bugs me! Mainly, I think, because even if all traditional religion is garbage, it's our garbage. History is dissected garbage; culture is recycled garbage. (To mix proverbs) build our house on that landfill... and inherit the lemon-scented wind. :balloon:
 
Last edited:
SimpleIrony said:
I've always found the term spiritual odd.

Isn't that like asking whether people are physical? Or biological?

Either everyone has a spirit, or they don't. If they don't, then no one is spiritual. If they do, then everyone is spiritual.

Not believing I have a spirit, I'd have to go with non-spiritual. But I don't consider anyone else spiritual either, so it does't bother me much that I'm not.:)
Click to expand...

Well the general view is the spiritual being "non-physical". Since what we are is the self-perpetuating pattern of behavior and not necessarily the matter/energy flowing in and out of us at any given time I think its safe to say that this pattern of activity could be considered "spirit". Now as to what people mean when they say someone is "spiritual" well...


spir·it·u·al /ˈspɪrɪtʃuəl/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[spir-i-choo-uhl] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective
1. of, pertaining to, or consisting of spirit; incorporeal.
2. of or pertaining to the spirit or soul, as distinguished from the physical nature: a spiritual approach to life.
3. closely akin in interests, attitude, outlook, etc.: the professor's spiritual heir in linguistics.
4. of or pertaining to spirits or to spiritualists; supernatural or spiritualistic.
5. characterized by or suggesting predominance of the spirit; ethereal or delicately refined: She is more of a spiritual type than her rowdy brother.
6. of or pertaining to the spirit as the seat of the moral or religious nature.
7. of or pertaining to sacred things or matters; religious; devotional; sacred.
8. of or belonging to the church; ecclesiastical: lords spiritual and temporal.
9. of or relating to the mind or intellect.
Click to expand...

/shrug

Take your pick. I personally like defs 3 and 9.
 
Tricky said:
No doubt that human emotions, as well as a number of other thought processes lead to scientific discoveries. We have to think of a hypothesis before we can test it. But thinking of these things is not really a part of the scientific process. Conspiracy theorists can think of things. Lunatics can think of things. (but I repeat myself). It is the testing that makes it science, and that must be done without emotion.
Click to expand...

Agreed, except that I think a kind of emotion is still involved in the testing of scientific theories - desire. We have a desire to do unbiased science, to find the most accurate answers to questions. We actively look for flaws in our data collecting or theories based on this desire, otherwise we'd be mere computers following the program's orders.

I'm sure we've all fallen for a conspiracy theory at some point (that sounded logical to us at the time). Some of us seem to have a built in desire to look like a fool amongst our peers - the lucky (or curious) ones of us work our way thru the logic, and learn the lesson of what happens when letting emotion provide your conclusions instead of logic. The result is, we actively work to keep our emotional answers in check, (through the desire to not be fooled again). I still don't think we can shut off our emotions completely in any situation - I don't know what that would 'feel' like.

To get back on topic more. In my experience, when I've run into someone who says, "I'm spiritual, not religious", I find that this is what they're referring to - not denying the emotional drive that's there, (and therefore cannot agree to certain scientific notions that denies this), but not falling for answers that fall outside of our reasoning capacity either. I've still to meet someone who says, 'I'm spiritual' and is referring to believing in ghosts or what-not, (it's more likely mushroom revelation of 'spirituality'. Therefore, I know that in some cases at least, 'spirituality' gets the cursive 'woo' status by strawmanning the definition.

Tricky said:
He was a bloody genius. I was a kid when I first started reading his stuff. I didn't "get it" of course, but by reading it, I became the political animal I am. He probably helped turn me into a liberal too. I don't know whether to thank or curse him for that.
Click to expand...

Same here! I forced myself to learn Kelly-ese because the pictures looked so cool. Once I cracked the code, I was not disappointed - it's brilliantly silly, witty, pointless and perceptive at the same time - still an inspiration after all these years.
 
I define "spiritual" in contrast to "religious." Religions are long laundry-lists of supernatural beliefs, but for people who don't want to subscribe to the whole list, just a few supernatural beliefs here or there, religion is not the way. If you have a few supernatural beliefs, but not all the beliefs of any one set of beliefs, you can say you're "spiritual."

It's like a set course meal versus ordering items a la carte. I don't see anything wrong with being "spiritual" as I define it. It makes a lot more sense to me than being "religious."

But I am neither "spiritual" nor "religious."
 
AkuManiMani said:
spir·it·u·al /ˈspɪrɪtʃuəl/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[spir-i-choo-uhl] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective
1. of, pertaining to, or consisting of spirit; incorporeal.
2. of or pertaining to the spirit or soul, as distinguished from the physical nature: a spiritual approach to life.
3. closely akin in interests, attitude, outlook, etc.: the professor's spiritual heir in linguistics.
4. of or pertaining to spirits or to spiritualists; supernatural or spiritualistic.
5. characterized by or suggesting predominance of the spirit; ethereal or delicately refined: She is more of a spiritual type than her rowdy brother.
6. of or pertaining to the spirit as the seat of the moral or religious nature.
7. of or pertaining to sacred things or matters; religious; devotional; sacred.
8. of or belonging to the church; ecclesiastical: lords spiritual and temporal.
9. of or relating to the mind or intellect.
Click to expand...
/shrug

Take your pick. I personally like defs 3 and 9.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I'm an unabashed atheist, and I'll describe myself as such if I'm asked. I also consider myself to be spiritual, in a manner that completely eschews religiosity or the supernatural. Organized religion has long tried to hold a monopoly on the word and everything it entails, but that does not mean that religion can define spirituality for everyone. In my case, it is my sense of awe and wonder at the universe, my curiosity, inquisitiveness, introspection, and creativity. It is the sense of inner peace and happiness that all people seek in life.

Sam Harris devotes an entire chapter to this form of spirituality in "The End of Faith" and I'm inclined to agree with him, because he describes what I've already been aware of. Like so many things in life, there are no imaginary gods required whatsoever. I don't need to fall back on a god because my unshackled mind can reach far beyond the limits imposed by any religion or god. For a better idea of spirituality without faith, I'll defer to the following article:

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/sam_harris/2007/01/consciousness_without_faith_1.html
 
No, I don't consider myself spiritual according to all the different definitions of "spiritual" I have heard.
 
If I believed in spiritual thinking I would say that everyone who posted in this thread helped lift my spirits. My motivation for asking was two-fold. It's possible that I might want to reply to an internet add someday (have sex with a neighbor.com) and must answer the "rate your spiritual" philosophy from 1 to 10. I have no spirirtual philosophy. I'm a zero on the philosophy scale.

I will tell you that I have been trying to quit drinking and AA is offensive to a non-theist. That is what motivated me to make this post.I have honestly stated at the couple of meetings I went to that I wish I could believe in god because in seems to make recovery quicker but I have no faith. People queue up after the meeting to talk to me. I have on occasion told people the difference between a rock and god is that rocks exist. The bottom line is that AA members are theists and people who think like me are unwelcome.
 
Senex said:
I will tell you that I have been trying to quit drinking and AA is offensive to a non-theist. That is what motivated me to make this post.I have honestly stated at the couple of meetings I went to that I wish I could believe in god because in seems to make recovery quicker but I have no faith. People queue up after the meeting to talk to me. I have on occasion told people the difference between a rock and god is that rocks exist. The bottom line is that AA members are theists and people who think like me are unwelcome.
Click to expand...

Of course: you're in a way telling them that having one's troubles all sorted out without having much more to do than ask (or pray) some deity is a delusion, which they somehow know but don't want to be reminded.
 
Flo said:
Of course: you're in a way telling them that having one's troubles all sorted out without having much more to do than ask (or pray) some deity is a delusion, which they somehow know but don't want to be reminded.
Click to expand...

What you say is true -- but what angers me even more is that AA members are taught to believe that they have the exclusive answer on getting past addiction. Us, non-theists, are screwed in their big red book.
 
The word tends to be one of those that generates a wide variety of definitions, and it's sort of positive-sounding so people tend to say "sure, I'm a spiritual person" without really being able to articulate what that might be.
To me, "spiritual" means "how people think about and react to things that they only imagine to exist."
A great deal of positive things tend to be lumped under the word, but I feel that these things would be better described by what they actually are. (Altruism, generosity, etc.)
 
Bikewer said:
The word tends to be one of those that generates a wide variety of definitions, and it's sort of positive-sounding so people tend to say "sure, I'm a spiritual person" without really being able to articulate what that might be.
To me, "spiritual" means "how people think about and react to things that they only imagine to exist."
A great deal of positive things tend to be lumped under the word, but I feel that these things would be better described by what they actually are. (Altruism, generosity, etc.)
Click to expand...

Yes, we all enjoy the occasional sunset: however we don't all enjoy the occasional theology.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom