This old chestnut, again

This old chestnut, again

Spirituality

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.

k
Flexible

The wrong side of 60

Joined
22 Dec 11
Moves
37114
12 Apr 21

@divegeester said
As I replied to this point earlier (perhaps you missed it), the fact that something is complex is not an excuse to replace a scientific explanation with a metaphysical or even religious one.

Because early man didn’t understand where the sky, the earth and themselves came from, they invented...Gods who created them.

What you are saying here is exactly the same thing ...[text shortened]... ot the same thing - and I confess to including the word “complex” as a bait to draw this out. Sorry.
The people who wrote the Bible didn’t understand where the “sky, the earth and themselves came from, they invented Gods who created them”
Are they the “early man” your referring to?
Just my opinion but any religion is the antithesis of spirit and spirituality. Whatever spirit is, supposing it exists, it cannot be put in a box created by corporeal man.

Cryogenically frozen

Joined
14 Mar 15
Moves
28761
12 Apr 21

@divegeester said
The “sense of self” is not called “spirit”, this is your own personal conflation. To conflate “spirit” as in a person’s character, sense of self determination etc, with a spiritual soul, is downright delusional.

I’m surprised you are even attempting it.
No, it isn't. Psychology is the study of the psyche, which itself relates to the sense of self, of conscious personality, of spirit. This has its roots deeper than your chosen religion. (Going back to the early Greeks).

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
12 Apr 21

@divegeester said
The “sense of self” is not called “spirit”, this is your own personal conflation. To conflate “spirit” as in a person’s character, sense of self determination etc, with a spiritual soul, is downright delusional.

I’m surprised you are even attempting it.
You just happen to call the “sense of self” etc. a "soul" because that's how your religion frames it.

Fighting for men’s

right to have babies

Joined
16 Feb 08
Moves
117122
12 Apr 21
2 edits

@ghost-of-a-duke said
No, it isn't. Psychology is the study of the psyche, which itself relates to the sense of self, of conscious personality, of spirit. This has its roots deeper than your chosen religion. (Going back to the early Greeks).
I’m completely comfortable with you believing in spirits and souls.

Are you suggesting that psychology is the study of spirits and souls? You are again erroneously conflating the word “spirit” with charter, personality and the sense of consciousness.

Fighting for men’s

right to have babies

Joined
16 Feb 08
Moves
117122
12 Apr 21

@fmf said
You just happen to call the “sense of self” etc. a "soul" because that's how your religion frames it.
In the instance you were referring to I was referring to Ghost of a Duke using “soul”.

Fighting for men’s

right to have babies

Joined
16 Feb 08
Moves
117122
12 Apr 21
2 edits

@kevcvs57 said
The people who wrote the Bible didn’t understand where the “sky, the earth and themselves came from, they invented Gods who created them”
Are they the “early man” your referring to?
Just my opinion but any religion is the antithesis of spirit and spirituality. Whatever spirit is, supposing it exists, it cannot be put in a box created by corporeal man.
Yes they are and I didn’t mean “early man” as in the normal sense of the term, I meant it in the context of early writings about metaphysical concepts such as gods being use to explain natural phenomena such as evolution.

Similarly I am referring to Ghost of a Duke apparently appealing to the metaphysical and what I would call “supernatural” (in its broadest sense) to explain natural phenomena such as the identification of self, individuality and sense of consciousness. I find it fascinating that a scientifically orientated atheist would appeal to terms such as spirit and soul and other ethereal notions because of my use of “complex” to describe the human brain somehow justifies using these ethereal concepts.

k
Flexible

The wrong side of 60

Joined
22 Dec 11
Moves
37114
12 Apr 21
1 edit

@divegeester said
Yes they are and I didn’t mean “early man” as in the normal sense of the term, I meant it in the context of early writings about metaphysical concepts such as gods being use to explain natural phenomena such as evolution.

Similarly I am referring to Ghost of a Duke apparently appealing to the metaphysical and what I would call “supernatural” (in its broadest sense) to ...[text shortened]... of my use of “complex” to describe the human brain somehow justifies using these ethereal concepts.
Well it’s probably that complicated. Many committed Christians are also committed scientists so I think it’s s bit harsh that you cannot be a committed atheist and commit to a spiritual belief out-with the need for a head honcho god spirit.
Do you believe that you cannot believe in a spiritual dimension, be spiritual, or discuss different options for a spiritual existence without believing in a god or gods?
Atheism is a belief in the non existence of god or gods period.

Cryogenically frozen

Joined
14 Mar 15
Moves
28761
12 Apr 21

@divegeester said
I’m completely comfortable with you believing in spirits and souls.

Are you suggesting that psychology is the study of spirits and souls? You are again erroneously conflating the word “spirit” with charter, personality and the sense of consciousness.
Psychology is the study of the psyche, which itself relates to the sense of self, of consciousness. In a religious context you may explain this as the soul, whereas in the context I describe it is the spirit, the inner spark. I fully accept it is not the spirit wrapped in religious dogma, but is spirit nonetheless.

Meditation and mindfulness, for example, are spiritual in the way they focus on the sense of self, of inner consciousness and awareness.

Cryogenically frozen

Joined
14 Mar 15
Moves
28761
12 Apr 21

@divegeester said
Yes they are and I didn’t mean “early man” as in the normal sense of the term, I meant it in the context of early writings about metaphysical concepts such as gods being use to explain natural phenomena such as evolution.

Similarly I am referring to Ghost of a Duke apparently appealing to the metaphysical and what I would call “supernatural” (in its broadest sense) to ...[text shortened]... of my use of “complex” to describe the human brain somehow justifies using these ethereal concepts.
You misunderstood. At no point have I appealed to any ethereal notions. You have simply been unable to untangle yourself from such notions due to being a theist.

Humans are spiritual without anything supernatural being brought to the table.

Fighting for men’s

right to have babies

Joined
16 Feb 08
Moves
117122
12 Apr 21

@ghost-of-a-duke said

Humans are spiritual without anything supernatural being brought to the table.
I disagree.

Spirits and souls are supernatural. The essence of things relating to souls is called spirituality. As in spiritualist and spiritualism.

Fighting for men’s

right to have babies

Joined
16 Feb 08
Moves
117122
12 Apr 21

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Psychology is the study of the psyche, which itself relates to the sense of self, of consciousness. In a religious context you may explain this as the soul, whereas in the context I describe it is the spirit, the inner spark. I fully accept it is not the spirit wrapped in religious dogma, but is spirit nonetheless.

Meditation and mindfulness, for example, are spiritual in the way they focus on the sense of self, of inner consciousness and awareness.
Psychology is a science is it not. Spirits, souls, spiritualism and spirituality are supernatural.

Fighting for men’s

right to have babies

Joined
16 Feb 08
Moves
117122
12 Apr 21

@kevcvs57 said
Well it’s probably that complicated. Many committed Christians are also committed scientists so I think it’s s bit harsh that you cannot be a committed atheist and commit to a spiritual belief out-with the need for a head honcho god spirit.
This is a class example of a non-sequitur.

Yes a theist can be a scientist, but it does not logically follow that a scientist can be committed to a spiritual belief.

Unless like ghost of a duke you wish to conflate spirituality with the meditative concepts related to consciousness. Which I maintain are simply cognitive processing.

Fighting for men’s

right to have babies

Joined
16 Feb 08
Moves
117122
12 Apr 21

@kevcvs57 said
Do you believe that you cannot believe in a spiritual dimension, be spiritual, or discuss different options for a spiritual existence without believing in a god or gods?
Atheism is a belief in the non existence of god or gods period.
Yes I do believe that, absolutely.
But you find me a scientist who believes it.

Besides this is an explosion of the word “spirituality” which I assert gets hijacked by those who do not believe in spirits, souls, or indeed anything supernatural.

Cryogenically frozen

Joined
14 Mar 15
Moves
28761
12 Apr 21

@divegeester said
I disagree.

Spirits and souls are supernatural.
Only through the eyes of a theist.

Cryogenically frozen

Joined
14 Mar 15
Moves
28761
12 Apr 21

@divegeester said
Psychology is a science is it not. Spirits, souls, spiritualism and spirituality are supernatural.
Again, psychology is to do with the psyche.

'Psyche comes from the Greek psykhe, which means “the soul, mind, spirit, or invisible animating entity which occupies the physical body.'


www.vocabulary.com