Can you be spiritual and an aethiest?

[danny la rouge]

This may surprise you greatly, but no. With that definition you might find yourself wondering if crystals are alive.

Only if you say that only living things possess those qualities.

 

[Jonti]

... can an atheist believe in "spirits", "souls" and "spirituality"?

People have marvelously plastic views. Some of us make a habit of believing in six impossible things before breakfast. So that's a yes, from me then

Some would point to high-church buddhism as an example of atheist spirituality.

 

[Jonti]

Only if you say that only living things possess those qualities.

So what are the defining characteristics of life?

 

[danny la rouge]

So what are the defining characteristics of life?

Organisms possessing the above qualities.

 

[fredfelt]

No; there is either a natural explanation for something or a supernatural explanation. Supernatural is literally "beyond nature".

That may be the case, but your belief that something has a natural explanation or a supernatural explanation is entirely up to you. My science could be your witchcraft.

 

[El Jefe]

That may be the case, but your belief that something has a natural explanation or a supernatural explanation is entirely up to you. My science could be your witchcraft.

<facepalm>

 

[danny la rouge]

That may be the case, but your belief that something has a natural explanation or a supernatural explanation is entirely up to you. My science could be your witchcraft.

I require very little in order to ascertain whether something has a scientific explanation or not: that it conforms to the scientific method.

 

[fredfelt]

Of course not. As soon as they start believing in certain things, they stop being an atheist, by definition

OK, yes you are right, but I was thinking in these terms - to quote wikipeida:

"The term atheism originated as a pejorative epithet applied to any person or belief in conflict with established religion"

 

[Jon-of-arc]

So what are the defining characteristics of life?

Can't remember what they all are, but there's seven of them and the acronym that I was taught in biology was

M
Reproduction
Sleep

Growth
Respiration
E
N

 

[danny la rouge]

"The term atheism originated as a pejorative epithet applied to any person or belief in conflict with established religion"

A bit like "terrorist suspect" today.

 

[camouflage]

Yes there is, we're animated by electromagnetic/electrical energy. That's what the spirit is.

Erm... I'm no biologist but no, it's not.

Spirit is a word, at it's most useful it can reffer to moral, elan, character, a feeling. At it's most useless you can throw it on the pile with crystal healing and the 'The Maternal Creative Vibe of the Earth Mother'. Most spiritualists probably do not subscribe to monotheistic religion actually. The godders tend to want to smite them and their witchery.

 

[Jon-of-arc]

Some would point to high-church buddhism as an example of atheist spirituality.

I would struggle to define a buddhist as a true aethiest. For example, they generally believe in some sort of teleological, karmic ying-and-yang type shit that has nothing to do with what I would call aetheism.

No expert in buddhism, though, and I understand that there are different interpretations of the religion.

 

[fredfelt]

I require very little in order to ascertain whether something has a scientific explanation or not: that it conforms to the scientific method.

Fine, but I can still be an athiest and not require my understanding of the world to confirm to scientific method. Well if you define atheism in a particular way.

 

[Jon-of-arc]

Even tho I hate the word 'spiritual' (usually used as a descriptor for someone with deeply reactionary and selfish views dressed up in a mask of universal caring and/or belief in the mysterious 'other'), I think atheism and being spiritual are necessarily antagonistic. For example, I love trees - I love looking at them, I love sitting under them, I love imagining the countless things happening in the life of any single tree and it makes me happy, calm and relaxed, a general feeling of wellbeing about myself and the world. For me that's a 'spiritual' element to my life, even tho it doesn't involve invoking any kind of 'spirit' entity...

Fucking hate the word itself tho - cover for all sorts of nonsense and nastiness...

As for 'soul'...well, it's my identity, my sense of self, not some meta/physical object that can float out of me!!

Well, quite. Although I wouldn't really say that the part of me that appreciates nature is "spiritual". It's just a part of me that appreciates nature.

But that is the problem with such a wishy-washy term, discussing it is so much a matter of interpretation that staying on the same page becomes almost impossible....

 

[danny la rouge]

Fine, but I can still be an athiest and not require my understanding of the world to confirm to scientific method. Well if you define atheism in a particular way.

What way?

 

[camouflage]

It would be inconsistent with my understanding of the term for an atheist to believe in anything supernatural.

xes, for example, from what he's said, is a Dualist, and probably some stripe of Pantheist. That wouldn't not be consistent with atheism.

I used to like the idea of calling myself a Pantheist, but then I did some research into it on the net and found the term riddled with spiritualists.

Now I don't bother, I'm an atheist and that's it. When I look up into a sky full of a billion stars it fills my heart and quiets my mind, and I refuse to construct any wordy man-made elaboration around the emotion of beholding something 'timeless', greater than myself or beautiful.

Bollocks to spirits, pants to gods. Universal conciousness? Indeed, but so what.

 

[danny la rouge]

pants to gods.

A Pantstheist.

 

[butchersapron]

A Pantstheist.

There truly is no god

 

[danny la rouge]

I have no shame.

 

[Meltingpot]

It's just possible to believe that we're all ourselves spiritual beings (which would fulfil the meaning of the term "spiritual") and yet not believe there is one "Big Guy" who created everything (instead, we all did). A lot of Scientologists are like that.

 

[Idaho]

belief in a creator God who no longer takes an interest in human affairs

What about a creator god who never had any interest in human affairs, nor any 'interest' in anything - but was merely a process of creation? What would that be?

 

[danny la rouge]

What about a creator god who never had any interest in human affairs, nor any 'interest' in anything - but was merely a process of creation? What would that be?

Deism.

 

[Idaho]

Deism.

So big bang theory is really a kind of deism. The creation of a rational creation myth?

 

[danny la rouge]

So big bang theory is really a kind of deism. The creation of a rational creation myth?

No, the because the orthodox Big Bang is understood as a scientific phenomenon - no supernatural being required. However, where it is understood as the moment of creation by Creator God who did just that then let it all take shape un-interfered with (as some no doubt do believe), that's Deism.

 

[girasol]

I think people have very personal definitions of spirituality just as they do of god and religion (or lack of).

Spirituality can be related to feeling connected to nature, for example, which is my personal view of it. And in that sense I'm spiritual. I also seek to become a better person as I grow older and I see that as part of spirituality too.

so, yes

 

[Idaho]

No, the because the orthodox Big Bang is understood as a scientific phenomenon - no supernatural being required. However, where it is understood as the moment of creation by Creator God who did just that then let it all take shape un-interfered with (as some no doubt do believe), that's Deism.

But what about the singularity itself? The place/event/concept that sparked the big bang? Science understands the rules as we can measure and predict them, but it doesn't negate a rule writer.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

But what about the singularity itself? The place/event/concept that sparked the big bang? Science understands the rules as we can measure and predict them, but it doesn't negate a rule writer.

Big Bang theory has nothing to say about the singularity, really. Studies attempt to recreate the conditions at, say, one millionth of a second after the Big Bang. But the moment when time began is itself inaccessible. In fact, even talking about 'time beginning' isn't valid.

 

[xes]

to answer the question properly. I think the answer is a big fat YES.

To do otherwise,is to box yourself into a particular belief,and that's not nessissary (I'm sorry,it's just after lunch and I've forgootten how to spell,yes,it would have been quicker to ggogle the spelling,rather than write this)

there's no need to box yourself into 1 particular belief if you don't want to. Take a bit from here,a bit from there,what ever makes you happy. Cos that's what it's all about

 

[butchersapron]

A bit of religion, a bit of atheism, a bit of city, a bit of united

 

[xes]

A bit of religion, a bit of atheism, a bit of city, a bit of united

and Bob's your transexual aunty