SPIRITUAL, BUT NOT RELIGIOUS

I just realized how stupid it is for me to argue this.

You are all spiritual if you wanna be.

My brother calls himself a god and a giant and he's shorter than me but I have learned not to argue it.

After all, reality is what you make of it. If you guys believe that the spiritual realm exists it does exist for you.

Same place that "art" comes from.
Any abstract idea is noncorporeal, whether it's written, represented, or thought, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

If you use the words "art", "beauty" or "anger" or "seven", it's still just an interpretation made by a person, concepts that don't have physical existence. Can you prove that a "decision" exists, except to claim it ad nauseum? Semantics. It's simply matches the definition.


Still looking for a suitable word you would use instead of "spirituality" for when people adjust how they exist and operate (as in my first post).

Quite frankly, the simpler I can make my life the better, so perhaps this whole argument is indeed a waste of my time.

Art comes from human imagination, you are right there. So do spirits.



This is not true.



This is what I mean by gibberish You just start waxing abstract and make nonsensical connections. Much of them are simply patently false but arguing with them is folly.

Just one:

Yes you can prove a decision exists. sigh (try it yourself before you make me do it, this will be less tedious that way).




In fitting with the total lack of criteria herein I propose the word jackalope. ;-)

Ya know, when people lack the word to express something they should not reify concepts. They should simply learn to express themselves.

There are plenty of hippy-sounding words one can use to describe that. You can have an "awakening" you can.. aww heck there is a perfectly fine word:

metamorphosis

Spirituality has nothing to do with churches and most churches have nothing to do with spirituality.

I beleive that would be 'metamorpisise', Craven, 'metamorphosis' refers to the the act, not the process.

You are incorrect cav, the word you cite does not exist and the act and the process can both be referred to using the same word. I will try to make this my last post here, I am being stupid to keep doing this as it's pointless to alienate people about.

Sorry all. Semantic differences are always frustrating and unrewarding.
The best you could do is have both people say "I told you so!"

The words I've been using have very specific definitions to me, and are logically accurate, consistent and useful if they're not mapped into physical ideas. But most people will take them differently from how I mean them. It would take a lot of definition and translation before each can understand what the other really means.

I'm more of a pragmatic engineer, and though I've never met a hippie I bet it would be interesting to figure out what definitions they use when they talk, too! Each language supports different ideas, and I'm always finding new ones.

Thanks for your patience anyways!
Best regards.

I realized neither that this can contained worms, nor that it was so capacious. Thanks to all so far, i've been reading with interest.

Craven missed my point entirely...but that's fine. I'll get back to this, I'm enjoying it so far.

I think he missed mine to but.. To go all the way back to the original question - yes. I'd say I'm a spiritual person (probbaly less than most but..) and it doesn't really effect me much one way or the other. If anything I'd guess it causes me to ask "Why?" more and it gives me a reason to pay attention to scientific reports in the news. I discarded any type of defined religous belief years ago.

Craven, would a personal example be a help in defining this strange concept some of us have?

Not at all, I understand you guys perfectly. Understanding and agreeing are often not bedfellows.

Hmm...okay, true enough. My reference to personal actually referred to you....don't matter. If the curiosity factor isn't intriguing, I won't bother, in all sincerity.

Sure, as long as it's about me I don't mind. I just don't trust my ability to discuss someone else's tightly held beliefs without alienating them right now.

K, I'll be back shortly with a couple of questions, just have to run a few errands.

Dammit - I am forced to agree with Craven here!

As an illustration - I am sometimes a sort of Buddhist (I have an overdeveloped tolerance of ambiguity, since I am, at other times, a hardened materialist, in the philosophical sense) - occasionally I try to say Buddhism is less credulous than isms and itys like christianity and islam, because there are no gods. However, I am soon forced to admit that once you start to believe in the spirit, in whatever form, you have no logical defence against gods and goddesses and naiads and dryads and panisci and suchlike (charming as some of these are).

Oh, I know some will say that a far vaguer and amorphouser and less prescriptive thingummybob is being spoken of here - and so it is - nonetheless, open the chinks to the spiritual and anything may enter, with no reasonable reason to bar the door to it, try as one may.

I have no special qualm with that, by the way, I am merely supporting the point that some have already made that this spirituality is logically the same sort of beast as religion - if you mean to make no claims of non-materiality, then by all means find a different word - because this one is, I believe, already taken!

Codeborg - I believe you cheated a little with your definitions 4, 5 etc. I think that definition 1, at least, must have contained a reference to a putative non-material entity/ies - from which the later definitions derive their meaning- even when the word sacred is playing on the reverence historically accorded such beast/ies, without specifically referring to them! LOL.

Stop rambling bunny and clear your mind you sometimes-Buddhist. You may agree with Craven, but it seems that you also may be missing the point. Note: anything that follows is NOT an attempt to define 'spirituality'....it is going to start as a series of questions, hopefully leading to either a conclusion, or an understanding of the 'feeling' of what is considered 'spiritual', whether or not that is the 'correct' definition. Okay...first question: Why did Craven start A2K? (Yes yes, I am certain you know where I am going with this....)

I like the spiritual high I get from a rich chocolate cake with rich cholocate ice cream. It's nervana.

My motivation was aleatory. I impulsively decided to one night when I was bored.