Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Religion v Spirituality
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 31 of 161 (449243)
01-17-2008 10:00 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by macaroniandcheese
01-17-2008 9:20 AM


Re: "My" two cents
bren writes:
curiosity (that is excessive curiosity) and wanderlust are subset of that which makes up spirituality. just like christianity isn't the sum total of religion.
Xianity is a religion.
Curiosity and wanderlust are not a spirituality.
What gets me is that everyone and their dog has thir own version of what 'spirituality' means.
Normally it's just a whooly catch all word for nebulous etheric concepts that hark back to the soul and use words like 'positive' and 'negative' energy, vibrations, crystals and the like.
On the other hand if you are using spiritual in a different way I would be interested to hear your definition.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by macaroniandcheese, posted 01-17-2008 9:20 AM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by macaroniandcheese, posted 01-17-2008 10:12 AM Larni has replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 32 of 161 (449245)
01-17-2008 10:12 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by Larni
01-17-2008 10:00 AM


Re: "My" two cents
my previous post:
message 6
it really all depends on how you look at the two subjects.
religion tends to evoke ideas of institutionalized ritual. but it doesn't really have to include such things. and institutionalized ritual doesn't have to involve anything supernatural.
spirituality tends to evoke solitary explorations of self and beyond. but it doesn't have to be hoodoo. spirituality includes such solidly science-defended things such as meditation. while that particular practice is often based on other understandings, meditation-type thought centering practices are widely recognized by the scientific community as having very real benefits. but, they don't come from the hoodoo, they come from yourself.
as far as i'm concerned, religion and spirituality are nothing more than exploring the world around you and taking note of how it affects you. different people have different answers, but all ritual is ritual and all exploration is exploration.
no, i don't mean "science is just another god" but that where we choose to look for answers does not change that we are looking for answers. you may or may not be satisfied with the answers or non-answers you get. that's your issue.
Xianity is a religion.
yes. unfortunately for this simile, christianity is a very specific and ritualized religion. others are not.
Curiosity and wanderlust are not a spirituality.
they can be. that's the thing about both religion and spirituality. they are always very individual. it's how a person answers questions for himself.
What gets me is that everyone and their dog has thir own version of what 'spirituality' means.
exactly. but how is that different from anything else subjective (as though, when people are concerned,there are objective things)?
Normally it's just a whooly catch all word for nebulous etheric concepts that hark back to the soul and use words like 'positive' and 'negative' energy, vibrations, crystals and the like.
according to whom? there are loads of "spiritualists" and "mystics" who are strict followers of traditional religions. modern "spirituality" tends to be a function of new-age, post native american wooo wooo, but that doesn't change the nature of spirituality in general.
the problem is that people tend to define a thing by it's current, most popular, most vocal incarnation. spirituality is no more defined by new age wooo wooo than christianity is defined by mandaean gnostics.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Larni, posted 01-17-2008 10:00 AM Larni has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Larni, posted 01-17-2008 3:17 PM macaroniandcheese has replied

  
BMG
Member (Idle past 209 days)
Posts: 357
From: Southwestern U.S.
Joined: 03-16-2006


Message 33 of 161 (449285)
01-17-2008 2:49 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Larni
01-17-2008 5:07 AM


Re: "My" two cents
How's that different from curiosity or wanderlust?
To be honest, I'm not entirely sure. I think a possibility is the subject that which arouses curiousity could be one of many determining factors. Another possibilty is, who is the person that is determining whether what they are curious about fits beneath the umbrella of "spirituality"?
I am curious as to why my cat pissed on the carpet, even though it knows where the litterbox is and has used it on many occasion. Is this a spiritual question? Personally, I don't think it is, but to someone that sees cats as an important spiritual being in their own subjective view may find this as a problem that deals with spirituality.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Larni, posted 01-17-2008 5:07 AM Larni has not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 34 of 161 (449294)
01-17-2008 3:17 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by macaroniandcheese
01-17-2008 10:12 AM


Re: "My" two cents
Bren writes:
the problem is that people tend to define a thing by it's current, most popular, most vocal incarnation. spirituality is no more defined by new age wooo wooo than christianity is defined by mandaean gnostics.
I know I'm kind of tilting at windmills on this one a little but I can't get the idea of whooly minded hippies sounding off about being so 'spiritual' as if that means something special out of my head.
Ill put my axe and grindstone away, for now.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by macaroniandcheese, posted 01-17-2008 10:12 AM macaroniandcheese has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by macaroniandcheese, posted 01-17-2008 3:18 PM Larni has not replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 35 of 161 (449295)
01-17-2008 3:18 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Larni
01-17-2008 3:17 PM


Re: "My" two cents
whooly minded hippies sounding off about being so 'spiritual'
i know. life's rough.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Larni, posted 01-17-2008 3:17 PM Larni has not replied

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 4985 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 36 of 161 (449358)
01-17-2008 7:06 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Larni
01-17-2008 8:44 AM


Re: Knowable spirituality
Are your hateful 'thoughts' physical?
On the question of spirit, my definition is energy and I believe all combined non-physical aspects of self are spirit. You are disputing this. What is your idea of spirit?
A rose by any other name would smell just as sweet.
Edited by Heinrik, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Larni, posted 01-17-2008 8:44 AM Larni has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Woodsy, posted 01-18-2008 10:29 AM pelican has replied
 Message 41 by Larni, posted 01-18-2008 12:58 PM pelican has replied

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 4985 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 37 of 161 (449369)
01-17-2008 7:24 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by Larni
01-17-2008 8:53 AM


Re: A Matter Of Perspective
E=MC2 is a formula. It proves two forms of the same thing. However they are totally different forms and it is the enrgy side of the equasion that I am referring to. Einstein could clearly see the difference or else it wouldn't be a formula. It would be one form.
Maybe you see e=mc2 as something else, if so I would love to hear it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Larni, posted 01-17-2008 8:53 AM Larni has not replied

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 4985 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 38 of 161 (449372)
01-17-2008 7:32 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Phat
01-17-2008 8:16 AM


Emotional energy v physical reaction
I am referring to the emotions, not the physical reactions to them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Phat, posted 01-17-2008 8:16 AM Phat has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 142 by Jaderis, posted 02-24-2008 7:10 AM pelican has replied

  
Woodsy
Member (Idle past 3373 days)
Posts: 301
From: Burlington, Canada
Joined: 08-30-2006


Message 39 of 161 (449545)
01-18-2008 10:29 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by pelican
01-17-2008 7:06 PM


Re: Knowable spirituality
Are your hateful 'thoughts' physical?
On the question of spirit, my definition is energy and I believe all combined non-physical aspects of self are spirit. You are disputing this. What is your idea of spirit?
You seem to be confusing processes with physical things. If thoughts and so forth are processes occurring in a physical setting (like a brain), it makes no sense to talk of them as substances, physical or otherwise. I suspect that this error is at the root of notions of "spirit" and "soul".
In a conversation recorded among Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett and Christopher Hitchens (you can find it on Dawkin's web site), a useful distinction came up: spiritual vs numinous. Numinous has to do with feelings such as wonder that occur to people. Such feelings are real experiences, but any connection to anything spiritual (non-material, gods, ghosts etc) has to justified separately.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by pelican, posted 01-17-2008 7:06 PM pelican has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Quetzal, posted 01-18-2008 10:46 AM Woodsy has not replied
 Message 42 by pelican, posted 01-18-2008 9:10 PM Woodsy has not replied
 Message 46 by Granny Magda, posted 01-20-2008 12:28 AM Woodsy has not replied
 Message 50 by pelican, posted 01-20-2008 9:07 AM Woodsy has not replied

  
Quetzal
Member (Idle past 5872 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 40 of 161 (449553)
01-18-2008 10:46 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by Woodsy
01-18-2008 10:29 AM


Re: Knowable spirituality
In a conversation recorded among Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett and Christopher Hitchens (you can find it on Dawkin's web site), a useful distinction came up: spiritual vs numinous. Numinous has to do with feelings such as wonder that occur to people. Such feelings are real experiences, but any connection to anything spiritual (non-material, gods, ghosts etc) has to justified separately.
Thanks for bringing this point up, Woodsy. I was trying to think of a good way to suggest that distinction. I had forgotten the idea of "numinous". I would posit that a sense of wonder - a sense of the numinous? - is a common trait shared across our species (although what constitutes "wonderous" would be different for different people, cultures, and times). I certainly feel a sense of wonder at many things in the world around me, but I've always been really uncomfortable with defining that as "spiritual" because of the association with gods, ghosts and things that go "bump" in the night.. "Numinous" sounds right.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Woodsy, posted 01-18-2008 10:29 AM Woodsy has not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 41 of 161 (449599)
01-18-2008 12:58 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by pelican
01-17-2008 7:06 PM


Re: Knowable spirituality
Heinrik writes:
What is your idea of spirit?
Untill there is any evidence of spirit my idea of spirit is tha there is no such thing.
Apart from booze, that is.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by pelican, posted 01-17-2008 7:06 PM pelican has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by pelican, posted 01-18-2008 9:13 PM Larni has replied

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 4985 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 42 of 161 (449730)
01-18-2008 9:10 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Woodsy
01-18-2008 10:29 AM


wrong thread
Edited by dameeva, : wrong thread

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Woodsy, posted 01-18-2008 10:29 AM Woodsy has not replied

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 4985 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 43 of 161 (449733)
01-18-2008 9:13 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by Larni
01-18-2008 12:58 PM


Re: Knowable spirituality
Untill there is any evidence of spirit my idea of spirit is tha there is no such thing
If spirit doesn't exist by your reasoning, what are you actually disputing?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Larni, posted 01-18-2008 12:58 PM Larni has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Larni, posted 01-19-2008 2:06 PM pelican has replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 44 of 161 (449865)
01-19-2008 2:06 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by pelican
01-18-2008 9:13 PM


Re: Knowable spirituality
If there is no such thing as spirit than it cannot be linked in any way to religion which is real.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by pelican, posted 01-18-2008 9:13 PM pelican has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by pelican, posted 01-19-2008 6:31 PM Larni has replied

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 4985 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 45 of 161 (449906)
01-19-2008 6:31 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by Larni
01-19-2008 2:06 PM


Re: Knowable spirituality
Spirituality seems to becoming very popular in different forms, do you think it will 'take over' religion?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Larni, posted 01-19-2008 2:06 PM Larni has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Larni, posted 01-20-2008 6:22 AM pelican has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024