Escaping Spirituality
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-06-2017, 04:09 PM
RE: Escaping Spirituality
Quote:I thought so too for a long time, until I realized I actually made myself worse through adopting the spiritualistic paradigm for self-improvement. In the end, I found that thinking about myself in naturalistic ways was much more realistic and productive.

If some people find spirituality useful, it must mean something to them. But as far as I can tell it just helps them socially, not personally.

I don't like to apply the term 'spiritual' or 'spirituality' to anything beyond meditation anymore essentially. And I would likely only use it in context when talking with other people who practice meditation. Enough conversation about it here and elsewhere has made me realize that too many religions have used the word in too many distinguishable ways, so that the word itself has little meaning, because it can mean anything to anybody. Some seem to react viscerally to it and others seem to be relatively unfazed by it. I think oftentimes there are other, better terms to use, and that's why the word 'spiritual' is not often uttered by atheists except for to refer to religious people, for the most part.

~ The Universe is under no obligation to make sense to you ~
-Neil Degrasse Tyson
[Image: stairway_to_heaven_by_tomtr.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Cosmo's post
03-06-2017, 05:08 PM
RE: Escaping Spirituality
(03-06-2017 02:07 PM)AB517 Wrote:  The universe makes everything.
I would say the universe IS everything (by definition). It doesn't make squat. It's simply a container. It doesn't have intentionality.
(03-06-2017 02:07 PM)AB517 Wrote:  Its a better axiom then "human made this and the universe made that'. because the latter is not true.
Well it's not true because the universe doesn't think or create. In my experience people who think the universe is conscious (which it would have to be to "make things") commit a composition fallacy. The universe contains sentient beings but that does not make the universe itself sentient. Nor is there any evidence that sentient beings tap into consciousness external to themselves.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-06-2017, 06:13 PM (This post was last modified: 03-06-2017 06:21 PM by AB517.)
RE: Escaping Spirituality
(03-06-2017 05:08 PM)mordant Wrote:  
(03-06-2017 02:07 PM)AB517 Wrote:  The universe makes everything.
I would say the universe IS everything (by definition). It doesn't make squat. It's simply a container. It doesn't have intentionality.
(03-06-2017 02:07 PM)AB517 Wrote:  Its a better axiom then "human made this and the universe made that'. because the latter is not true.
Well it's not true because the universe doesn't think or create. In my experience people who think the universe is conscious (which it would have to be to "make things") commit a composition fallacy. The universe contains sentient beings but that does not make the universe itself sentient. Nor is there any evidence that sentient beings tap into consciousness external to themselves.

definitely parts of your claim here is valid.

obviously we can't say the whole thing is or is not. As far as "tapping into consciousness external to themselves" you have to know that on a chemistry, physics, and biology level that is wrong. we tap into each other everyday by chemicals, emr, sound, and other things. So you're wrong there. please modify your claim to make it match observations.

composition fallacy? that's a load dude. To be intellectually honest we have to talk about volumes of space that think. so lets look at it empirically.

You are thinking and you are part of the universe. You claim The universe is everything, hmmm, everything including you, empirically speaking, parts of it are thinking.

don't worry, I don't do god, the universe does what it wants. not what you, or I want to believe in. the interactions that make you think are part of a larger more complex system. I can't say for sure the whole thing thinks, but I know you are.

our brains are a complex volume in a larger more complex volume. as whole we don't know. thats true, what volume would you honestly like to address that does?

after that we need to talk about connections. Can you show me one volume of space that is not connected to another volume in our immediate volume? I mean you are I are connected through this computer. Only space and time are different then one brain cell being connected to another brain cell. or one bee being connected to the hive.

How does a bee hive do what it does? what are the volumes of awareness interacting in that? i say you can understand how you are affected by the group, a bee doesn't know. Some people can't know, comprehend, or understand either.


now to "making"

empirical, the universe made you, it made you through evolution. If the universe didn't make you then what did?

leave your opinions about having to have intentions, intellect, and other stuff. We don't know what the whole of the universe has so inserting personal opinions just clouds what we are talking about.

lmao, i like that notion of a container, a container, like a cell wall is a container? is a cell alive?
Not one single part in a cell is alive. Is the cell alive mord?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-06-2017, 06:22 PM
RE: Escaping Spirituality
Quote:the universe does what it wants

... ...

Edit: I've changed my mind. I can't R & R to this shit anymore.

~ The Universe is under no obligation to make sense to you ~
-Neil Degrasse Tyson
[Image: stairway_to_heaven_by_tomtr.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-06-2017, 06:37 PM
RE: Escaping Spirituality
(03-06-2017 06:13 PM)AB517 Wrote:  
(03-06-2017 05:08 PM)mordant Wrote:  I would say the universe IS everything (by definition). It doesn't make squat. It's simply a container. It doesn't have intentionality.
Well it's not true because the universe doesn't think or create. In my experience people who think the universe is conscious (which it would have to be to "make things") commit a composition fallacy. The universe contains sentient beings but that does not make the universe itself sentient. Nor is there any evidence that sentient beings tap into consciousness external to themselves.
As far as "tapping into consciousness external to themselves" you have to know that on a chemistry, physics, and biology level that is wrong. we tap into each other everyday by chemicals, emr, sound, and other things. So you're wrong there. please modify your claim to make it match observations.
I am not suggesting that we aren't influenced by our environment. I'm making the claim that any individual's consciousness comes from and is located in that individual, not somewhere external to them.
(03-06-2017 06:13 PM)AB517 Wrote:  composition fallacy? that's a load dude. To be intellectually honest we have to talk about volumes of space that think. so lets look at it empirically.

You are thinking and you are part of the universe. You claim The universe is everything, hmmm, everything including you, empirically speaking, parts of it are thinking.
And this is exactly the composition fallacy, right there. You are confusing a "has a" relationship between two things with an "is a" relationship.
(03-06-2017 06:13 PM)AB517 Wrote:  after that we need to talk about connections. Can you show me one volume of space that is not connected to another volume in our immediate volume? I mean you are I are connected through this computer. Only space and time are different then one brain cell being connected to another brain cell. or one bee being connected to the hive.
Two brain cells are in contact with each other. A bee interacts directly with its hive. Take that bee a hundred miles away and it's no longer "connected" to its hive. Take a brain cell out of your brain and it's no longer connected to its neighbors. The analogy you are trying to make is so strained that is has no real meaning.
(03-06-2017 06:13 PM)AB517 Wrote:  empirical, the universe made you, it made you through evolution. If the universe didn't make you then what did?
Evolution is driven by natural selection.

The only intentional agents involved in making me were my parents. And they didn't even intend to make me, I was mommy & daddy's little accident when they were both about 40 and thought they were done making babies.
(03-06-2017 06:13 PM)AB517 Wrote:  leave your opinions about having to have intentions, intellect, and other stuff. We don't know what the whole of the universe has so inserting personal opinions just clouds what we are talking about.
If we don't know about everything in the whole universe then let's admit that and not just make stuff up as placeholders.
(03-06-2017 06:13 PM)AB517 Wrote:  lmao, i like that notion of a container, a container, like a cell wall is a container? is a cell alive?
Not one single part in a cell is alive. Is the cell alive mord?
Containership and inheritance are two different things. We are contained in the universe, not descended from it.

A single cell is not analogous to what we're talking about.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes mordant's post
03-06-2017, 06:49 PM
RE: Escaping Spirituality
(03-06-2017 06:22 PM)Cosmo Wrote:  
Quote:the universe does what it wants

... ...

Edit: I've changed my mind. I can't R & R to this shit anymore.

the word 'wants freaks you out. remove the word wants. The universe does what the universe does. regardless of what we believe.

do you want to do anything?
does a cow want to do anything?
does a worm?
a cell?

The simple fact is that whatever you are doing, volumes of the universe are doing. A group of cells that have absolutely no emotion when grouped together form you.

is the system we are in more complex than our brains or less complex than our brains?

you can run from the tough questions, but theist do the exact same thing. yup, they are free all right; to run away and hide behind a personal reality. more like personal imagination to me.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-06-2017, 06:50 PM
RE: Escaping Spirituality
(01-06-2017 08:02 PM)Angra Mainyu Wrote:  Way to be a downer. There is such a thing as the supernatural realm. Don't you have an imagination?

I'm pleased to see that you acknowledge that the supernatural is all in one's imagination. Most of the scripture in holy books, and belief in the actual existence of gods, is today deemed to be imaginary—as there's no empirical evidence supporting either notion.

Imaginary: —existing only in the imagination; the act or power of forming a mental image of something not adduced by the senses, or not wholly perceived in the real world.

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-06-2017, 06:57 PM
RE: Escaping Spirituality
(03-06-2017 06:37 PM)mordant Wrote:  
(03-06-2017 06:13 PM)AB517 Wrote:  As far as "tapping into consciousness external to themselves" you have to know that on a chemistry, physics, and biology level that is wrong. we tap into each other everyday by chemicals, emr, sound, and other things. So you're wrong there. please modify your claim to make it match observations.
I am not suggesting that we aren't influenced by our environment. I'm making the claim that any individual's consciousness comes from and is located in that individual, not somewhere external to them.
(03-06-2017 06:13 PM)AB517 Wrote:  composition fallacy? that's a load dude. To be intellectually honest we have to talk about volumes of space that think. so lets look at it empirically.

You are thinking and you are part of the universe. You claim The universe is everything, hmmm, everything including you, empirically speaking, parts of it are thinking.
And this is exactly the composition fallacy, right there. You are confusing a "has a" relationship between two things with an "is a" relationship.
(03-06-2017 06:13 PM)AB517 Wrote:  after that we need to talk about connections. Can you show me one volume of space that is not connected to another volume in our immediate volume? I mean you are I are connected through this computer. Only space and time are different then one brain cell being connected to another brain cell. or one bee being connected to the hive.
Two brain cells are in contact with each other. A bee interacts directly with its hive. Take that bee a hundred miles away and it's no longer "connected" to its hive. Take a brain cell out of your brain and it's no longer connected to its neighbors. The analogy you are trying to make is so strained that is has no real meaning.
(03-06-2017 06:13 PM)AB517 Wrote:  empirical, the universe made you, it made you through evolution. If the universe didn't make you then what did?
Evolution is driven by natural selection.

The only intentional agents involved in making me were my parents. And they didn't even intend to make me, I was mommy & daddy's little accident when they were both about 40 and thought they were done making babies.
(03-06-2017 06:13 PM)AB517 Wrote:  leave your opinions about having to have intentions, intellect, and other stuff. We don't know what the whole of the universe has so inserting personal opinions just clouds what we are talking about.
If we don't know about everything in the whole universe then let's admit that and not just make stuff up as placeholders.
(03-06-2017 06:13 PM)AB517 Wrote:  lmao, i like that notion of a container, a container, like a cell wall is a container? is a cell alive?
Not one single part in a cell is alive. Is the cell alive mord?
Containership and inheritance are two different things. We are contained in the universe, not descended from it.

A single cell is not analogous to what we're talking about.

inheritance? we are not talking about inheritance.

did the universe make you? tahts the question.

I don't care about intentions, we can't claim intentions for the whole of the universe. your parents didn't even have the intention, your were assembled automatically ... just like you said..


a cell wall is the container. its exactly, fractal style, relevant. because life and non life are all we have to compare the system around us to.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-06-2017, 07:05 PM
RE: Escaping Spirituality
(03-06-2017 01:33 PM)AB517 Wrote:  You are interested in forcing your belief on others. Just like a run of the mill fundamental theist...

Way to represent atheism.

This proves that you have very little understanding of atheism. Any/all fundamentalists belong to religious movements that're characterized by strict beliefs in the literal interpretation of its religious texts.

Atheists hold no "religious" beliefs; have no dogma; no "holy" book; and no specific codes of ethics or morals.

In short, we have NO belief to "force" onto others—unlike Christian proselytisers.

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-06-2017, 08:38 PM
RE: Escaping Spirituality
(03-06-2017 06:37 PM)mordant Wrote:  
(03-06-2017 06:13 PM)AB517 Wrote:  As far as "tapping into consciousness external to themselves" you have to know that on a chemistry, physics, and biology level that is wrong. we tap into each other everyday by chemicals, emr, sound, and other things. So you're wrong there. please modify your claim to make it match observations.
I am not suggesting that we aren't influenced by our environment. I'm making the claim that any individual's consciousness comes from and is located in that individual, not somewhere external to them.
(03-06-2017 06:13 PM)AB517 Wrote:  composition fallacy? that's a load dude. To be intellectually honest we have to talk about volumes of space that think. so lets look at it empirically.

You are thinking and you are part of the universe. You claim The universe is everything, hmmm, everything including you, empirically speaking, parts of it are thinking.
And this is exactly the composition fallacy, right there. You are confusing a "has a" relationship between two things with an "is a" relationship.
(03-06-2017 06:13 PM)AB517 Wrote:  after that we need to talk about connections. Can you show me one volume of space that is not connected to another volume in our immediate volume? I mean you are I are connected through this computer. Only space and time are different then one brain cell being connected to another brain cell. or one bee being connected to the hive.
Two brain cells are in contact with each other. A bee interacts directly with its hive. Take that bee a hundred miles away and it's no longer "connected" to its hive. Take a brain cell out of your brain and it's no longer connected to its neighbors. The analogy you are trying to make is so strained that is has no real meaning.
(03-06-2017 06:13 PM)AB517 Wrote:  empirical, the universe made you, it made you through evolution. If the universe didn't make you then what did?
Evolution is driven by natural selection.

The only intentional agents involved in making me were my parents. And they didn't even intend to make me, I was mommy & daddy's little accident when they were both about 40 and thought they were done making babies.
(03-06-2017 06:13 PM)AB517 Wrote:  leave your opinions about having to have intentions, intellect, and other stuff. We don't know what the whole of the universe has so inserting personal opinions just clouds what we are talking about.
If we don't know about everything in the whole universe then let's admit that and not just make stuff up as placeholders.
(03-06-2017 06:13 PM)AB517 Wrote:  lmao, i like that notion of a container, a container, like a cell wall is a container? is a cell alive?
Not one single part in a cell is alive. Is the cell alive mord?
Containership and inheritance are two different things. We are contained in the universe, not descended from it.

A single cell is not analogous to what we're talking about.

sorry I don't know how to partial quote. again, parts of your what you are saying are totally true. But they are not what we are talking about.

I didn't claim the consciousness in me isn't coming from me. I would have said, if I said anything, that our consciousness is almost totally defined by the system it is in. You said it isn't tapping into something outside of itself. that's just a false claim, and you modified it. Good job by you.

no, you are flat out wrong with the composition fallacy. I never said the universe as a whole is, or is not thinking. I said, if you are thinking then parts of the universe are thinking. thats empirical. i actually said we don't know what the whole of the universe is doing.

we need to address reasonable volumes, or parts if you like, that are thinking. we can't have a rational discussion if we do not address a reasonable volume that can be investigated and possibly make a measurement.

you are right about separating the bee from its hive and it doesn't have anything guiding it. It can't, because of its state, interact with its hive. again, we need to talk about a reasonable volume. A bee is influenced by its hive within a given volume that is larger than its "bee hive". It goes out, and comes back. Thats how information and energy transfer happen. There are limits, back to a reasonable volume of space again.

Take a brain. let the cells become the 'species" itself, you have a colony, a hive, a herd. there isn't much difference between the information transfer. We are more complex, but the system we are in is even more complex than our brain. This statement is based directly in chemistry, physics, and biology. Take it to any college you want and check what i said with a science person. Mord, in all honesty i know you know its true.

i didn't do placeholders. you are dismissing placeholders that I never used. so what gives with that? All I asked you to do is to address what i am saying using volumes of space that make the claim empirical. You pick the volume, but it has to be a reasonable size.

You are right, evolution is driven by natural selection. What's natural selection driven by? The rules of this universe. but that doesn't matter, I don't care. the universe made you through the process of evolution, if not, tell me what made you?

no, the cell wall is a example of a container. It is reasonable to treat the universe as being a hierarchy of structure that includes this container of yours. The notion, as you surely know, is called fractals. a cell fits.

sure you would like to use gas can, so we are a fluid universe in a gas can. we can, in effect, treat ourselves and the rest of the system around us as a fluid. fluid dynamic and Thermodynamics apply, hmmm, I think you know where that leaves our isolated brains.

a single cell is exactly what we are talking about. What else do we have to compare the system we are too? making a measurement is a comparison of unknown to a known. What size volume are we picking and what are we using to measure it?

now link it back to spirituality.

again, some spiritual people say they feel this woo woo connection to something bigger. well the connection to something bigger is true. The woo woo stuff isn't my area. i no sooner deal in that then deal with people treating dogs like children. Thats their emotional need, not mine. I only deal with what the particular claim is not what it means. Their is a relationship between dog and person. its weird for sure to a guy like me, but its there. I see people have a relation with plants. thats even more weird, but they have it.

some people take their relationship with reality to even a weirder place. Like the person treating that dog like a child, they treat their relationship with reality far past what i would call reasonable.

i see people woo wooing about art, football, trees, roses, or whatever. the base claim is what it is. Idon't get art at all.

sorry about the parials. My savantness is being an idiot.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: