Too whom?
Seems, to me, at least some people say things like “I’m not religious, but I’m very spiritual” This often code for ideas like “I’m too stupid and/or shallow to believe in anything complex which makes any kind of demands” Such people find the term very useful.
Below a favourite Tim Minchin clip, called ‘Storm’. The protagonist is I think I pretty good example of the non religious spiritual person .
A tough call, but I’m going to stick my neck out here…
Ah, so his wife pushed him down the stairs. Waited until he was drunk, smart move.
How can krypton have anything to do with superman when we have no evidence for anybody like superman?
It can be fictional and still have a valid definition in the fictional sense because people truly believe some things.
No
While spiritual experiences might be from the brain, “spirituality” entails a belief that they aren’t.
A belief that is at odds with reality is called a delusion. The fact that no one can cite anything approaching objective evidence that anything spiritual exists, inclines me towards disbelief?
Storm is a great clip. I have probably posted it twice myself. And I will listen to it again because you posted it. Goooood Stuff.
And when you ask for facts or evidence for that belief, what do you get? “I don’t know what the fuck it is. It’s just there.” You get woo woo explained by higher abstractions of woo woo. Saying it is believing experiences are outside the brain tells me nothing at all. Demonstrate there anything spiritual outside the brain.
It doesn’t have to tell you anything.
People like to make up words to describe what they want to describe, however silly it may be.
And this is why, at the very beginning of this thread, I attempted to define “spirituality”.
We all need to agree on a common definition so a conversation can move forward.
Yes.
Although I disagree that it could be called delusional. For it to be delusional there must be evidence to support the contrary.
I’m not sure that’s true.
adjective
Is it rational to believe something exists beyond the reality of the physical material world and universe? If so I’ve seen no rational argument to support that position.
I’d also argue that nothing in our reality objectively evidences anything beyond the material physical world and universe. So whilst I can’t claim it doesn’t exist, positing spiritual does exist as a rational claim that isn’t contradicted by reality, would have to make all unfalsifiable claims equally valid.
If I’m talking to an invisible white rabbit I believe to be real, am I delusional?
I think religions and religious apologists are paid the courtesy, for the most part, of not using words like delusion, but I don’t think that it has anything to do with such beliefs not satisfying that definition.
Oh, that makes sense.
Yes I think you’re right.
Definitions seem to vary across dictionaries ever so slightly. Or perhaps it’s more likely that I misinterpreted them.
Well they’re sometimes nuanced enough to tacitly support opposing arguments.
Whenever I think I understand a word, I test myself to see how close my perception is to the dictionary definition, and it’s disconcerting how often I’m wrong.
I just blame it on my age.
I never challenge anyone’s claims without checking the relevant definitions first, no matter how sure I am of my position.
I did in that post, and delusion is a word I’ve seen challenged more often than not on here, for fairly obvious reasons. Theists get tetchy about it in my experience.
VALID: (of an argument or point) having a sound basis in logic or fact; reasonable or cogent.
FICTION: literature in the form of prose, especially short stories and novels, that describes imaginary events and people.
The valid definition is “fiction.” Same thing as “I don’t know.” All one need do is ask for the evidence supporting the claim. It’s fiction, made up, non-factual, and nothing is behind it. All you get is, “I don’t know.” “faith.”
Yep. I’m also very fond of the pope song. I like Tim for his subtle wit.
Aw alright-
I misused those then. Sorry.
Yep it’s faith.
The very term “spiritual”, just like “religious” or “devoted” or “faithful” disgusts me…all of them have become empty and devoid of any meaning, as far as I see it.
Spiritual but not religious? Thanks, but no thanks!
Oh they have meaning: faithful (accepting claims without evidence), spiritual (that undefined feeling connecting with “spirit”), religious (adhering to doctrine and tenets based on indemonstrable claims; usually accompanied by rituals), devoted (focused on that particular thing almost exclusively; centering your life around it).
For myself also. Happened naturally when I raised my standards for evidence.
All of these are the reason why I reject such labels. Even the label of “spiritual seeker” is rejected.
And I definitely did label myself as that.
Now I can look back on those wasted, pointless years and shake my head because once I realized I was an atheist, the quality of life improved a lot. The fear and confusion dissipated like smoke in the wind, and now I am able to better appreciate my wife, my dog, everyone I know and everything I do, even the simple act of sitting on the balcony and watching the sunset.
One sign of my transition is that I changed my saying from “god is life” to “life is good”.
I have posted this video previously, and I am unapologetic in doing again. This very video marks a seminal point in my life. I almost tear up every time I watch it.
