What does it mean to be "Spiritual but not Religious"?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-09-2017, 10:07 AM
RE: What does it mean to be "Spiritual but not Religious"?
(23-09-2017 10:05 AM)Anjele Wrote:  
(23-09-2017 10:04 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  SBNR

Squirrely but not regulated.

I take something to stay regular.

Do you think it will work?

Paxil is made of win. Thumbsup

living word
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
23-09-2017, 10:10 AM
RE: What does it mean to be "Spiritual but not Religious"?
(23-09-2017 10:05 AM)Anjele Wrote:  
(23-09-2017 10:04 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  SBNR

Squirrely but not regulated.

I take something to stay regular.

Do you think it will work?

It should theoretically, but he keeps smoking the Metamucil and trying to dissolve the weed in water. I keep telling him that THC is not soluble in water and the lungs don't need or want any more fiber, I like to think that somewhere, deep down, he will recall this if I just keep repeating it.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
23-09-2017, 10:50 AM
RE: What does it mean to be "Spiritual but not Religious"?
(18-09-2017 12:45 PM)Rockblossom Wrote:  There's a recent study done by Pew Research:
More Americans now say they’re spiritual but not religious

Quote:About a quarter of U.S. adults (27%) now say they think of themselves as spiritual but not religious, up 8 percentage points in five years, according to a Pew Research Center survey conducted between April 25 and June 4 of this year. This growth has been broad-based: It has occurred among men and women; whites, blacks and Hispanics; people of many different ages and education levels; and among Republicans and Democrats.

Quote:Many in the “spiritual but not religious” category have low levels of religious observance, saying they seldom or never attend religious services (49%, compared with 33% of the general public) and that religion is “not too” or “not at all” important in their lives (44% vs. 25% of all U.S. adults). But others in this group appear to be quite observant, at least by traditional measures – 17% say they attend religious services weekly, and 27% say religion is very important to them. In both cases, those who think of themselves as spiritual but not religious are more observant than those who say they are neither religious nor spiritual.

I admit to being baffled by "spiritual" people, as it seems to have a thousand meanings and none at all.

Thoughts?

There are people who believe in angels and fairies. My wife picks up white feathers which she says brings her good luck. She thinks there are "spirits" out there who guide people and make things right. It's a way these people deal with their anxiety over the realisation that in this world of science, it's increasingly silly to believe in God as a real thing, and he's not very cuddly, so they retreat into a woolly-minded, cosseted view of the world as being guided by "something" indefinable but profoundly "nice". It's escapism.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Deltabravo's post
23-09-2017, 03:07 PM
RE: What does it mean to be "Spiritual but not Religious"?
People who want the benefits of religion (whatever the hell that might be...) but are too lazy to follow any particular dogma.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Dark Wanderer's post
23-09-2017, 06:04 PM
RE: What does it mean to be "Spiritual but not Religious"?
Okay, I don't really use the word "spiritual." I did so in my intro post because I thought it would be easier than explaining everything I currently believe. So I'm just going to do that, and if you think that's spiritual, then so be it. I certainly do not believe in angels and fairies, and I find it pretty hypocritical that atheists who suffer the most from false labels being put on us by non-atheists are ready to do that to others. I used to be a nihilistic type atheist. But I've been through a number of things despite my young age, including substance abuse/dependency and a couple of organ failures (well, it was both kidneys). So I had to reason with myself, and look a little deeper at things, because I felt pretty bad. (I should mention that I was incredibly lucky and got a transplant from a relative only after 7 months on dialysis.) I was too far removed from the Abrahamic religions for that to be an option, they were ridiculous to me. (Funny enough, they're actually more ridiculous now that I am more "spiritual.")

Also, some acid may or may not have gone into making these conclusions. But it's not as if I'm the first to think them. Far from it. And I have no issue with you thinking I'm stupid or loony for thinking them, I'm not trying to convince anybody at all of anything really.

I see discussion about immortality. We are immortal. All we know and ever will know is life. When we die, our consciousness ceases to be, and we won't know any better. All we have known, know, and ever will know is life. So I would argue that I do in fact live forever, because I won't exist to realize I don't.

But that's quite difficult to think of because it's hard to imagine not being, and it bothers a fuckton of people. It bothers me for sure. We're constantly looking for security in our lives, so we obviously want to know that it's not all for naught, that our deeds and our experiences won't just disappear with us. The anxieties we harbor are always concerned with the future. Work on Monday can prevent you from feeling good on a Sunday afternoon. Even if you're nervous about something you're presently doing, the reason you're nervous is because of what could happen in the future (perhaps the very, very near future) because of what you're currently doing. So if we have such anxiety about the future, and we look to stabilize it as best we can, then people are largely going to look for a reason to look forward to it instead of dread it. Hence religious belief. I don't fault people for it, but looking for security is largely irrational. We don't like the flow of life. We want to get what we want and how we like things and we want it to stay that way, but pesky life just keeps getting in the way of that. There is nothing secure about life. As mentioned, it is going to end, and everything you've done along with it. What is the point of chasing security when what you're trying to secure cannot be secure?

Firstly, we must realize that we don't have bodies; we are bodies. Our brain is as much a part of our body as our feet are, or as my new kidney is. It is another organ serving its function. We need to realize that the "I" that we identify ourselves as doesn't exist. It's something our very advanced minds have conjured up. An identity. During a 400ug LSD trip I experienced "ego death", which is probably the most fascinating experience you could have. Looking at the world around you with the "I" removed is quite breathtaking, and, as far as I know, impossible while sober. In that moment I was experiecing life in its purest form, without the "self" getting in the way. I was living in the moment, in every sense of the term. I realized that the key to being happy and to living (relatively) stress-free is to live in the moment. Duh, right? You've heard that several times before. There's probably a sports clothing company that preaches it. But rarely do people actually try to apply it (of course, trying to live in the moment would inherently be a contradiction Wink )

So, with that in mind, I borrow from the Taoist school of thought, which, in a barebones analysis, tells us to be like water. It is soft and yielding, able to adapt to any twists and turns in its flow. There may be an interruption in its flow, but it will always flow wherever comes next naturally, even if that is not the original path it was on. Its formlessness allows it to adapt to almost any situation, and it only adapts to the current moment, it does not form itself to the container it may come into in 4 miles, but rather where it is AT THAT moment. So, Taoism tells us, take the "watercourse way" and be like water, and that will be the key to happiness and relieve stress. Some depression and anxiety may be better treated by psychiatry rather than philosophy, but the majority will benefit from this way of thinking. You cannot try follow the Taoist teachings; if you try to be like water, then you've already failed. It simply must just be done. Which is what makes it so difficult in our society... the way we live promotes quite the opposite. And I also realize that this way of thinking comes with some privilege, particularly economic privilege. But there is such widespread depression and suicide among my generation, and I think the changing times are the cause of this. We are as anxious as can be. We need to find a way to cope.

So, if you've made it this far, it's time for you to tell me; am I spiritual?

"You are what the universe is doing like a wave is what the ocean is doing."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Aegon's post
23-09-2017, 07:07 PM
RE: What does it mean to be "Spiritual but not Religious"?
(23-09-2017 06:04 PM)Aegon Wrote:  I see discussion about immortality. We are immortal. All we know and ever will know is life. When we die, our consciousness ceases to be, and we won't know any better. All we have known, know, and ever will know is life. So I would argue that I do in fact live forever, because I won't exist to realize I don't.
That's not the generally used or accepted definition of "immortal" and I don't think it's helpful to invent new meanings. "Immortal" means your consciousness continues in a form that is recognizably "you" beyond death. If you want to argue this is a false dichotomy, knock yourself out, but if you believe our consciousness ceases at death -- and you do -- then you believe us to be mortal. And I agree with that. My mortality wouldn't trouble me after death even if it troubled me now (it doesn't) but that's not the same as being immortal either.
(23-09-2017 06:04 PM)Aegon Wrote:  Firstly, we must realize that we don't have bodies; we are bodies. Our brain is as much a part of our body as our feet are, or as my new kidney is. It is another organ serving its function. We need to realize that the "I" that we identify ourselves as doesn't exist. It's something our very advanced minds have conjured up. An identity. During a 400ug LSD trip I experienced "ego death", which is probably the most fascinating experience you could have. Looking at the world around you with the "I" removed is quite breathtaking, and, as far as I know, impossible while sober. In that moment I was experiecing life in its purest form, without the "self" getting in the way. I was living in the moment, in every sense of the term. I realized that the key to being happy and to living (relatively) stress-free is to live in the moment. Duh, right? You've heard that several times before. There's probably a sports clothing company that preaches it. But rarely do people actually try to apply it (of course, trying to live in the moment would inherently be a contradiction Wink )

So, with that in mind, I borrow from the Taoist school of thought, which, in a barebones analysis, tells us to be like water. It is soft and yielding, able to adapt to any twists and turns in its flow. There may be an interruption in its flow, but it will always flow wherever comes next naturally, even if that is not the original path it was on. Its formlessness allows it to adapt to almost any situation, and it only adapts to the current moment, it does not form itself to the container it may come into in 4 miles, but rather where it is AT THAT moment. So, Taoism tells us, take the "watercourse way" and be like water, and that will be the key to happiness and relieve stress. Some depression and anxiety may be better treated by psychiatry rather than philosophy, but the majority will benefit from this way of thinking. You cannot try follow the Taoist teachings; if you try to be like water, then you've already failed. It simply must just be done. Which is what makes it so difficult in our society... the way we live promotes quite the opposite. And I also realize that this way of thinking comes with some privilege, particularly economic privilege. But there is such widespread depression and suicide among my generation, and I think the changing times are the cause of this. We are as anxious as can be. We need to find a way to cope.

So, if you've made it this far, it's time for you to tell me; am I spiritual?
I would say that you are curious about and actively exploring the unconscious and alternate modes of consciousness and methods of self awareness and detachment from particular outcomes. Some would lump that under spirituality but nothing you have said claims there is a supernatural or spirit realm and to me that means that "spirituality" would be technically wrong at the same time as, by many people's lights, fair usage.

We can argue till the cows come home about what "spiritual" means, I avoid using it for things that aren't strictly about invisible beings and realms because it's a word that's misused and abused in being bandied about to the point that it doesn't mean much if you're trying to really be specific. What you just described is not about gods, devils, angels or heaven, and using a word that suggests that to an awful lot of people isn't probably the best idea.

That is of course just my opinion, for what it's worth, which is not much.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like mordant's post
23-09-2017, 08:28 PM
RE: What does it mean to be "Spiritual but not Religious"?
(23-09-2017 07:07 PM)mordant Wrote:  We can argue till the cows come home about what "spiritual" means, I avoid using it for things that aren't strictly about invisible beings and realms because it's a word that's misused and abused in being bandied about to the point that it doesn't mean much if you're trying to really be specific.

The problem is that it is always context-dependent. When I ask ManlyGirl to "Cover me while I go spiritual." she knows that might mean 4 hours, 12 hours, 24 or even 36 hours or maybe only 15 minutes depending on which spirit I'm talking about. Since she's responsible for the inventory, all is well. So yes, when I'm talking spiritual, I am being specific.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-09-2017, 03:53 AM
RE: What does it mean to be "Spiritual but not Religious"?
(23-09-2017 06:04 PM)Aegon Wrote:  Firstly, we must realize that we don't have bodies; we are bodies. Our brain is as much a part of our body as our feet are, or as my new kidney is. It is another organ serving its function. We need to realize that the "I" that we identify ourselves as doesn't exist. It's something our very advanced minds have conjured up. An identity.

. . .

So, if you've made it this far, it's time for you to tell me; am I spiritual?

Many people mistake their self-concept for their self.

No, I don't think you're spiritual. I agree with Mordant.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-09-2017, 06:28 PM
RE: What does it mean to be "Spiritual but not Religious"?
(23-09-2017 04:46 AM)Thoreauvian Wrote:  Agreed. I think your definition of "epiphenomenalism" is different than standard usage.
It's more general (and more recent) than the traditional definition from the philosophy of mind.

--
Dr H

"So, I became an anarchist, and all I got was this lousy T-shirt."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-09-2017, 06:38 PM
RE: What does it mean to be "Spiritual but not Religious"?
(23-09-2017 06:34 AM)DLJ Wrote:  
(23-09-2017 04:46 AM)Thoreauvian Wrote:  Agreed. I think your definition of "epiphenomenalism" is different than standard usage.

Yup. Seems more like Holism.

Unsure

No, it's not holism, which regards the whole as "greater than the sum of its parts".
General epiphenomenalism recognizes that certain parts are necessary in order for certain phenomena to occur, but the phenomena are part of the system of parts when they do occur.

A crude example: When a bowling ball at the top of a hill is unbalanced, it rolls down the hill. The ball, the hill, the unbalancing force, and gravity are all necessary for the rolling to occur. But "rolling" isn't something that's mysteriously added to the system; it's a natural consequence, and therefore a component of, that particular system.

"Rolling" is a description of one state of that system. "Consciousness" is a description of one state of a brain.

--
Dr H

"So, I became an anarchist, and all I got was this lousy T-shirt."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: