L
LibralAteoJesus
Guest
do what to do.
- Status
D
dshix
Guest
J
jmcrae
Guest
Yes - everyone is spiritual. If you were not spiritual, you would cease ever to have existed.
L
LibralAteoJesus
Guest
Care to explain what spirituality is?
J
jmcrae
Guest
It is to be or to ever have been a living organism who experiences reality through symbols and language, and who interacts with reality, both directly (physically) and through symbols and language, for his own benefit and the benefit of others.
L
LibralAteoJesus
Guest
So it’s more like a psychology.
M
moxee
Guest
i know for sure that if you read IMITATION OF CHRIST by thomas akempis many of your questions will be answered
S
St_Francis
Guest
What makes any of this spiritual?
S
St_Francis
Guest
If spiritual means something like this: *1. of, relating to, or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things; 2. of or relating to religion or religious belief, *then a materialist, by definition, could not be spiritual.
However, because human beings are actually material *and *spiritual created beings, even materialists have a concern with the spiritual. Materialist who notice their spirituality will either deny their materialism, deny their spiritualism, or twist the idea of spirituality to fit into their materialist philosophy.
po18guy
Well-known member
Rather, psychology has erupted on the scene as spirituality has declined. It is a reflection of the fact that man, by his very nature, is first a spiritual being and also a religious being.
E
edwest2
Guest
Spirit is often used to mean a soul or higher power. Spiritual is defined as:
“1.of, relating to, or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things.”
The Catholic Church’s mission is to spread the Gospel and invite people to have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. An unfocused or undirected spirituality cannot exist. To exist, it needs a focus. Ideally, it should be the truth, not just a feeling.
Pope Benedict XVI
“We are moving toward a dictatorship of relativism which does not recognize anything as for certain and which has as its highest goal one’s own ego and one’s own desires. The church must defend itself against threats such as “radical individualism” and “vague religious mysticism”. [emphasis added]”
Peace,
Ed
“1.of, relating to, or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things.”
The Catholic Church’s mission is to spread the Gospel and invite people to have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. An unfocused or undirected spirituality cannot exist. To exist, it needs a focus. Ideally, it should be the truth, not just a feeling.
Pope Benedict XVI
“We are moving toward a dictatorship of relativism which does not recognize anything as for certain and which has as its highest goal one’s own ego and one’s own desires. The church must defend itself against threats such as “radical individualism” and “vague religious mysticism”. [emphasis added]”
Peace,
Ed
V
valekhai
Guest
Well, if it’s not obvious by now, it all hinges on what you mean by “spiritual.” Even materialists/naturalists/atheists get into this discussion. Many reject the word due to its vagueness and religious connotations, but others think it’s a valid way of describing some part of reality (although not a supernatural one, of course). For one person’s explanation of the latter position, I’d recommend reading Sam Harris’ article “In Defense of 'Spiritual.”"
B
balto
Guest
St Francis:
I think what jmcrae is getting at is that a human being’s spirituality refers to their rational soul which gives them the ability to reason. For a simple example, a person can have sensory experiences of various dogs which leads them to reason to a universal concept of “dog” and what it means for an object to be a dog. It isn’t just isolated data points of instances of dogs but a universal principle of “dog-ness.” Since “dog-ness” cannot be experienced via the senses (it is an immaterial concept after all), the concept is realized through a rational soul or spirit. Scenarios like this are sometimes used to argue for the existence of the human rational soul seeing as though there isn’t any evidence, at least that I am aware of, of sub-human animals being able to reason to universal concepts.
The whole language thing refers to our ability to explain universal concepts to each other through semantics. i.e. It’s not just the words, but the meaning behind them which humans communicate to one another. Somebody correct me if I have this wrong
.Nowadays spirituality seems to have become some kind of thing involving subconscious mental experiences triggered either externally or internally in the human. But I think that spirituality is supposed to refer to the ability to exhibit rational thought (intellect) and the ability to love (will).
S
St_Francis
Guest
I see what you are saying, but I am not sure I agree with you, for a couple of reasons. For one, it seems like the above ideas are used more as a gateway or analogy to the spiritual, and for another, these aspects of our humanity are such that the materialist simply accepts them as a part of his self, and the selves of others, and doesn’t make the leap to the spiritual.I think what jmcrae is getting at is that a human being’s spirituality refers to their rational soul which gives them the ability to reason. For a simple example, a person can have sensory experiences of various dogs which leads them to reason to a universal concept of “dog” and what it means for an object to be a dog. It isn’t just isolated data points of instances of dogs but a universal principle of “dog-ness.” Since “dog-ness” cannot be experienced via the senses (it is an immaterial concept after all), the concept is realized through a rational soul or spirit. Scenarios like this are sometimes used to argue for the existence of the human rational soul seeing as though there isn’t any evidence, at least that I am aware of, of sub-human animals being able to reason to universal concepts.
The whole language thing refers to our ability to explain universal concepts to each other through semantics. i.e. It’s not just the words, but the meaning behind them which humans communicate to one another. Somebody correct me if I have this wrong
Nowadays spirituality seems to have become some kind of thing involving subconscious mental experiences triggered either externally or internally in the human. But I think that spirituality is supposed to refer to the ability to exhibit rational thought (intellect) and the ability to love (will).
B
balto
Guest
You are making valid points and I see what you’re saying. I apologize if I made it sound like spirituality is more concerned with rational thinking. The ability to love other human beings and know and love God are more important for sure. The problem the materialist will inevitably encounter by accepting rationality as part of their self as you have said is whether the self is a reality or not. If materialism is true, then the self is an illusion that reduces to neurochemical processes in the brain. This means that any of our thoughts are not real insights because we can’t help thinking them. Even the “insight” that materialism is true is not a real insight and therefore not to be trusted. After all maybe they were just programmed to think materialism is true when it really is not. So I think that accepting rational thinking as something that is real and distinct from the body is a gateway as you stated but useful nonetheless for getting someone at least open to the idea of spirituality especially for someone coming from a materialist or naturalist background. I hope I am making some sense.
J
jmcrae
Guest
Symbols and language are spiritual means of communication. The world makes itself known to us by spiritual means, and we in turn make ourselves known to it by spiritual means.
Q
Qoeleth
Guest
Most materialists are only materialists in a certain sense. Normally, they will accept the aesthetic and ethical values (whether as ‘really existent’ or even only as ‘experiences’). In either case, it means that beauty, goodness and justice would still matter to them. Hence, most materialists could be, to some degree, spiritual.
Sometimes, there can be a kind of ‘spirituality of no spirituality’, if that makes any sense, like a ‘beauty of ugliness’. For example, Jean-Paul Sartre and E.M. Cioran, both committed atheists, often become quite spiritual in their vision of emptiness and meaninglessness.
A good test is appreciation of music. Anyone who appreciates music in any way, must recognise some spiritual content, since music has no material value or substance. Is there such a thing as a person who would say, “All music is a waste of time!”? If there is, I would dread to meet such a person.
Sometimes, there can be a kind of ‘spirituality of no spirituality’, if that makes any sense, like a ‘beauty of ugliness’. For example, Jean-Paul Sartre and E.M. Cioran, both committed atheists, often become quite spiritual in their vision of emptiness and meaninglessness.
A good test is appreciation of music. Anyone who appreciates music in any way, must recognise some spiritual content, since music has no material value or substance. Is there such a thing as a person who would say, “All music is a waste of time!”? If there is, I would dread to meet such a person.
- Status