DiscussMormonism.com

This is mostly for the atheists / agnostics / humanists / secularists / naturalists among us, but of course, anyone can join in. I'm not a thread nazi.

(Oh oh... thread closed due to Godwin's Law before it even gets started. Crap).

Well, in case they let that one go, tell me: do you think there is such a thing as spirituality which is actually a separate component of a person's being like the physical, emotional or mental? If so, what do you mean by that?

My personal opinion is that it's simply a mental construct, and is just another name for a certain emotional state (perhaps it's an emotional construct?)

What do you think?

My sense of "spirituality" is still somewhat tied to feelings of peace and joy. This, I believe, is due to my Mormon upbringing and conditioning. I no longer believe that these feelings come from an outside, holy ghost-like source. I believe they are phsyiological responses to certain stimuli.

I pretty much agree with you Schmo. But then I'm going on my own lack of it.

I'm more inclined to believe that spirituality, per se, is more of a conjunction of feelings and beliefs. Whether there is some way to quantify that as a separate state, such as emotional, physical, etc., I think there is probably no way to do it.

Some Schmo wrote:This is mostly for the atheists / agnostics / humanists / secularists / naturalists among us, but of course, anyone can join in. I'm not a thread nazi.

(Oh oh... thread closed due to Godwin's Law before it even gets started. Crap).

Well, in case they let that one go, tell me: do you think there is such a thing as spirituality which is actually a separate component of a person's being like the physical, emotional or mental? If so, what do you mean by that?

My personal opinion is that it's simply a mental construct, and is just another name for a certain emotional state (perhaps it's an emotional construct?)

What do you think?

I disagree on "spirituality" being an emotional state or mental construct. I actually just recently expressed my views on this in Tarski's thread. I don't think "spirituality" exists in any meaningful way. I do think "happiness" and "frustration" exist. But you have to be careful and not ask too many questions like, is he really a happy person? Was wickedness ever happiness? Or does he have real Joy in his life? Because then you run up against ideology and might as well ask if he's "Christian". Now, I wouldn't rule out of court the possibility of ideology playing a part in evaluating a person. For instance, Aristotle's Eudaimonia is a good candidate because it's a fairly well articulated position, though in practice I wish anyone luck with making the call.

But unlike Eudaimonia, "spirituality" intones ideology yet doesn't have a clear one. If we think spirituality is important, then we're likely to see our friends or respected authorities as spiritual. A laid-back hippie smoking a bong is spiritual to other hippies, but merely lazy and directionless to a right wing Christian. Yet on the other hand, without too much reflection, a Christian passing by a hippie who suddenly kisses his girlfriend might think, "Ha, that guy's having a good day".

But "spirituality" accross the emotional and dispositional plane is also vacuous. It could mean the person literally is connected with a spirit-realm and influenced by forces for good. It could mean the person is calm, nice, reflective, or sincere. It could mean the person is a strong and fair leader. It could mean the person is feeling warm inside. It could be a combination of a number of different feelings and actions that make a person likable to us.

But no matter what outward appearance and inward sincerity, it's all a sham if there's an ideological conflict. The guy who talks like Truman Madsen is spiritual, as long as he doesn't offend us with an opinion, then it's all "fake". The young man fealing peace, calm, and joyous inside is spiritual until we find out he'd just been told to leave the Church and believe in the Bible only. The sick person in the ward is spiritual unless we start thinking s/he's enjoying the sympathy too much. The woman who puts up with the jerk of a husband is spiritual until we think she's codependent.

In short, where I might differ from some of my fellow atheists is that I think spirituality is self-justified confusion, not delusions that will ever be pinpointed in the brain.

Gadianton wrote:

Some Schmo wrote:This is mostly for the atheists / agnostics / humanists / secularists / naturalists among us, but of course, anyone can join in. I'm not a thread nazi.

(Oh oh... thread closed due to Godwin's Law before it even gets started. Crap).

Well, in case they let that one go, tell me: do you think there is such a thing as spirituality which is actually a separate component of a person's being like the physical, emotional or mental? If so, what do you mean by that?

My personal opinion is that it's simply a mental construct, and is just another name for a certain emotional state (perhaps it's an emotional construct?)

What do you think?

I disagree on "spirituality" being an emotional state or mental construct. I actually just recently expressed my views on this in Tarski's thread. I don't think "spirituality" exists in any meaningful way. I do think "happiness" and "frustration" exist. But you have to be careful and not ask too many questions like, is he really a happy person? Was wickedness ever happiness? Or does he have real Joy in his life? Because then you run up against ideology and might as well ask if he's "Christian". Now, I wouldn't rule out of court the possibility of ideology playing a part in evaluating a person. For instance, Aristotle's Eudaimonia is a good candidate because it's a fairly well articulated position, though in practice I wish anyone luck with making the call.

But unlike Eudaimonia, "spirituality" intones ideology yet doesn't have a clear one. If we think spirituality is important, then we're likely to see our friends or respected authorities as spiritual. A laid-back hippie smoking a bong is spiritual to other hippies, but merely lazy and directionless to a right wing Christian. Yet on the other hand, without too much reflection, a Christian passing by a hippie who suddenly kisses his girlfriend might think, "Ha, that guy's having a good day".

But "spirituality" accross the emotional and dispositional plane is also vacuous. It could mean the person literally is connected with a spirit-realm and influenced by forces for good. It could mean the person is calm, nice, reflective, or sincere. It could mean the person is a strong and fair leader. It could mean the person is feeling warm inside. It could be a combination of a number of different feelings and actions that make a person likable to us.

But no matter what outward appearance and inward sincerity, it's all a sham if there's an ideological conflict. The guy who talks like Truman Madsen is spiritual, as long as he doesn't offend us with an opinion, then it's all "fake". The young man fealing peace, calm, and joyous inside is spiritual until we find out he'd just been told to leave the Church and believe in the Bible only. The sick person in the ward is spiritual unless we start thinking s/he's enjoying the sympathy too much. The woman who puts up with the jerk of a husband is spiritual until we think she's codependent.

In short, where I might differ from some of my fellow atheists is that I think spirituality is self-justified confusion, not delusions that will ever be pinpointed in the brain.

Interesting point of view.

I don't think it really exists either except to the extent that people have given this "thing" a name. I have no doubt, however, that everyone who uses it is attaching it to something different in their experience... just like they treat the terms "cult" or "brainwashing."

silentkid wrote: I no longer believe that these feelings come from an outside, holy ghost-like source. I believe they are phsyiological responses to certain stimuli.

Agreed.

Blixa wrote:I pretty much agree with you Schmo. But then I'm going on my own lack of it.

:)

ozemc wrote:I'm more inclined to believe that spirituality, per se, is more of a conjunction of feelings and beliefs. Whether there is some way to quantify that as a separate state, such as emotional, physical, etc., I think there is probably no way to do it.

I agree, and think it's because they simply aren't separate.

I think spirituality could mean many things. Like, say, suppose a person were a Nazi and thought that Hilter was a spiritual...
ooops!

LOL