Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
Now,
I’m patient ... I’ll wait for you to absorb the info...
Dada dada dada (humming to self)
Ok. I don’t think you mean “alcohol” when you get “spiritual”...
However, the imagination of human’s is a powerful tool; incredibly useful, however nothing is “original” just a reworking or interpretation of how we perceive the world around us.
So the origin of spirit is “breath”
How’d that get to “deity” and mystical “spirits”.
Hmmmm. Go back, way back to “early man”.
Man breathes. Doesn’t have a clue what he “breathes”, but it gives him “life” (early man has noticed a link that when things are not breathing they are dead).
Interesting observation. Invisible, life-giving - can be “felt” (wind). Wow.
The word has since “evolved” in its use and is still linked to its origin - where man took something unknowingly life-sustaining and attached various deity meanings to it.
...however we now know what breath is, and what “air” is and respiratory processes...and it’s not “invisible” anymore...
So, yes, the word can be used in a symbolic manner when (if you noticed the usage of “spirit”) to specific emotions...
But the word “spiritual” IS wrapped in the arms of supernatural invisible vagueness ...
Now, I will turn my attention to a young teenager that actually doesn’t need to be spoon fed the art of clear, concise conversation and actually presents information I, in turn, can learn from.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkdmOVejUlI
moo
moo
You do realize I was using that exact reference in this thread?
@ Homer
All I can do is describe how I deal with using vague words that may imply religion.
Many months ago I stated "this hurts my soul" (or something similar). I was challenged on that, and broke it down to explain how for me "soul" encompassed my empathy, my sensitivity, my expectations, and imagination. I did not roll everything into one messy ball and give it a confusing label.
This is part of my temperament and training. My first true profession was in the aerospace sector, where a mistake could kill many people. For that profession, one must be incredibly specific and concise.
I am fortunate that my wife of many years has a PhD in abnormal psychology, and Masters in two other disciplines of psychology. She has taught me a lot, although I never win any arguments *chuckle* That knowledge has benefited me a lot in my understanding on how the world works and why people do what they do.
How is saying your "soul" is "my empathy, my sensitivity, my expectations, and imagination", ok but when I say something is "spiritual" by saying "that film welled emotion, spirit, passion and desire to be more than what reason and logic tells me I have to be." Is a "messy ball with a confusing label"?
@ Homer
How is saying your "soul" is "my empathy, my sensitivity, my expectations, and imagination", ok but when I say something is "spiritual" by saying "that film welled emotion, spirit, passion and desire to be more than what reason and logic tells me I have to be." Is a "messy ball with a confusing label"?
Empathy, sensitivity, expectations, and imagination can be described specifically and have a clear and concise meaning. Each of those four discreet disciplines can be studied, measured, and explained.
So "Empathy, sensitivity, expectations, and imagination" are good words to use and "emotion, spirit, passion and desire" are not good words to use and had I said that the film welled my sense of "empathy, sensitivity, expectation, and imagination" instead there would have been no "messy ball"?
That's all it takes?
Let’s go back to the context. Word play games.
The UU in #3 listed “spiritual growth”
It is a church. It is a watered down Christian church.
I know exactly how “they” are using it, otherwise they wouldn’t enjoy a “tax free” status...
Enjoy your “spiritual growth” with them and keep praying for your “fruits of the spirit”.
However you describe meaning to the above.
You are way far up the road from where David wanted my personal definition and example, twice, of the word spiritual.
And David and I are "this close" to détente on the whole issue anyway.
@ Homer
Define "spirit"
Do you understand that you ceaselessly, despite all the cautions by others, to use vague words?
Try this: when you experience powerful emotions, try to break them down because even you can not identify "spirit" as an internal emotion. I suggest you attach the appropriate words, such as joy, elation, stimulated, or euphoric, for example.
David, where are you going here? We had the words you prefer and I was asking if they were ok!
Are they ok?
Because if so, we can just use "my empathy, my sensitivity, my expectations, and imagination." when talking about the realm of "spirit", "spiritual", and "soul" when using them in the sense the non-supernatural and we should have something that gets your seal of approval! Right? I'm fine using them as defined there.
@homersimpson
There is zero demonstrable objective evidence, or physical suggestions that a soul, as religious dogma suggests. Same thing goes for prayer. You know, it takes about 13 Tev of energy at the LHC to smash a couple particles into smaller building blocks. If someones lifetime is stored in the body, as it has to be physically stored, as supernatural things are not measured in our universe. So, to separate the information equaling a lifetime, physically, as there is no other way of doing that, a persons body would have to be subjected to nearly unfathomable levels of physical energy. Now I have seen quite a few people die, and there is no release of energy needed to separate the physical part of a body containing a claimed soul...as a matter of fact, nobody is burnt to a crisp when they die, or pray.
Now, anything else you feel, is a byproduct of neuronal activity, or, in other words, originating in your own brain.
Now, on a side note, calling your physical feelings, by anything other than the word feelings, is misleading do to the religiosity connotation tied to those words...which is directly inline with your purpose of being a theist on an atheist site.
Now, if you claim a supernatural spirituality/soul, you are delusional. If you think that your feelings are given to you by some outside source other than your own brain...you are delusional.
I'm only talking about the subject in the nonsupernatural sense. I'm keeping the scope at the Richard Feynman David level here that is all over this conversation and assert nothing more.
ROTFLMAO...deflection. Using words that do not describe your feelings accurately, for words soaked in religiosity, for such a dishonest person as yourself, is just more dishonesty. Nobody takes anything you say, seriously...have you noticed that? Its because dishonest apologists like you, are not interested in honest debate.
No, I'm talking about the same element of existence that Feynman, David, Sam Harris, and many atheists talk about.
If you wish to deny that part of your humanity then do so.
@homerdoh
ROTFLMAO, more deflection.
If you would like to deny your apologetic dishonesty, then do so.
I believe David already mentioned this, and I apologise if it was another poster. However if by spirituality all you mean is a long list of natural phenomena they why not use the existing accurate descriptions? Since the word spirituality also has other aspects to its definition, that include unevidenced superstition?
In debate especially I find it counter productive to use vague or even inaccurate terms words or language. Like the idiot troll JACKSON5 claiming atheism is a religion, rather than the more accurate, but equally dishonest idea, that atheists religiously follow atheism. The second term, though still a dishonest generalisation, obviously was less provocative, so being a troll whose sole purpose is to try and provoke a reaction, he used the first lie, that contradicts the definition of both words.
When I hear someone talk about emotions, or the power of the human mind, or human empathy etc etc, I know what they are referring to. When I hear someone talk about spirituality, I know it involves woo woo supernatural aspects, which are completely unevidenced. For instance, the idea of a soul, which if I'm correct you claim to believe is real, so for you to use the word, but then claim you didn't mean it to have any supernatural meaning is doubly confusing.
Also I have to say, that in the past I have encountered theists who did this, then pages or weeks later claimed that it did have supernatural components, but then dishonestly try to justify this duplicity, by claiming things like the soul are in fact natural phenomena. Almos as if they were setting some sort of clumsy trap for the atheists in the discussion.
So it'd be far more pragmatic if we all use terms that were as precise as possible, and thus as accurate as possible. Of course it's an individual choice, but I suspect you will always get called on it in a forum that is predominantly atheistic, and where we have all experienced enough of this to be extremely wary.
Sheldon. I defined something as spiritual as requested, actually requested twice, and I clearly stated that it was in a spiritual manner that had nothing to do with anything supernatural from the get go in describing it. I was called on it as me needing to describe each emotion individually instead, and then was sent a video where someone referred to their soul.
I mentioned that I found that interesting, and I get that people are "living souls" and it was "poetic".
If you think your interjection is going to sway me here from what I am going to do with this, then you sir, are completely mistaken.
@ Sheldon
He isn't going to go down the road of precise and clear communications, Homer prefers to play the word game and evade.
One word ... fruit.
@Homer
I'm hardly alone in finding your posts vague, or misleading. I've already explained why.
Rest assured it's been clear from the start almost, that you are a person not easily swayed from the "position" you've chosen. Though this of course won't stop me commenting on or arguing against that "position", if I am minded to.
Indeed, some people might consider that the purpose of a debate forum.
As always I'm happy to accept claims for which sufficient objective evidence can be demonstrated. So any claims about a soul I simply don't believe, nor will I until that they're properly evidenced.
Mingling such superstitious claims for the supernatural with other claims that might be objectively evidenced, is precisely why I always ask people making such claims to accurately define those claims.
@Homer - right...re: I'm just trying to point out that the word doesn't have to mean "supernatural".
Spirit can also mean breath. So what does a religion mean by its use?
“Breath growth”
“Personal growth”
“Soul growth”
Why such a vague term? To “insert” an invisible god thingy or “imply we are ‘more’ than flesh and blood?”
I’ve physically “grown”. My personality has developed and changed through the years depending on how I viewed myself, others and this “world” in which we live.
Would I vaguely describe myself as “spiritually growing” - no, Jesus, it sounds stupid. The implication is there is some vague “spirit/soul” that is “growing”.
Learning. Yes. Applying what I learn...sure, if I chose to. Learning from others? Yup.
Get specific with yourself.
All superstition and religious apologetics is crafted this way, because they mistakenly think it negates the need for evidence, and possibly even proper or accurate discussion. It's not an accident. try asking a child to describe Santa Claus, and you'll get a similar feel of their being taught to believe something intangible indefinable and of course, not just unevidenced, but not requiring evidence, beyond pointing to the presents that appeared inexplicably overnight.
Children grow up, religious apologetics does not. We wouldn't hide our disdain of such wishy washy nonsense in any other context, we spare children because we want them to enjoy their childhood, but why do we spare adults who espouse superstition in this way?
@nyar
"Skeptic alarm at 9."
LOL.
@ Homer
I understand emotional, psychological, and intellectual growth but they snuck in this "spiritual" crap.
Many many years ago while I was courting this sweet young thang, I got conned for twenty bucks at a local fair. At that time I was pissed, but it imprinted on me the necessary cautions one needs in order not to be conned. In other words, I am always on the lookout for a con, and when an organization sneaks in a very theistic concept word "spiritual", all of my alarm bells are going off.
I get it how this Unitarian group want to be non-threatening and warm and fuzzy for some people, but behind it all, they still gather in a church to worship and promote some theistic concepts.
Well you seem to be acknowledging that while many people claim to value the pursuit of "truth", some people recognise the inherent value of objective evidence in that process. Without it I am not sure the word truth is even applicable.
Take that one out and you basically have the core principles of most secular humanist societies. As an atheist I'd want no part of claims or beliefs which have no basis in objective reality, and principle 3 seems therefore to be odds with other principles in there.
You don't need any religious affiliation for any of the rest. Though some of them seem at odds with some core christian doctrine to me. I also think politics should be entirely separate from religious affiliations, as I think religious beliefs add baggage and have an agenda that is not always transparent and often pernicious. As for equality for example, I find most religions are in my experience deeply divisive, just as one example.
Pages