The opposite of Spiritual

a corporealist.

I will stand by "atheist" and a non spiritual one at that. When I was very much younger, I sought the spiritual in different ways, but ultimately it fell by the wayside. Humans developed by a series of accidents and fortunate circumstances, a series of happenings that may or may not be unique, but none of it makes us particularly special in the scheme of things. If humans went extinct, it would be inconsequential to anything or anyone but ourselves. Spiritual is fine as a balm for some, but I don't need it.

The word "atheist" does work for me, Max...but to suggest that it simply means that one doesn't believe in any gods" is to short shrift the word. Many dictionaries suggest that it means, "A belief that there are no gods."

Macmillan: someone who believes that God does not exist
http://www.onelook.com/?w=atheist&ls=a

Merriam Webster: a person who believes that God does not exist
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/atheist

Cambridge Dictionary: someone who believes that God does not exist
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/atheist

Many atheists do a lot of “believing.”

Not the ones here in A2K, for the most part. Most of our atheists do not have a belief that no gods exist.

Weird!

There are atheists who are Spiritual. Many Buddhists consider themselves to be atheists, and many atheists accept metaphysical constructs such as "human rights" or "virtue".

I am an atheist. That word just means someone who doesn't believe in God (or gods). But I want a word that specifically addresses my lack of belief in anything metaphysical. It appears that word would apply to you too Edgar (but it wouldn't apply to all atheists).

Well, let us know if you find it. For now, I am content without one, but would consider using the right word.

Either way Frank. You can believe that there are no gods, and still believe in metaphysical concepts such as human rights or virtue.

"Gods " are so unnecessary, so that the term aetheist is only a denial of its existence and as such, is the central core of their own lives> Thats kinda dumb.
A corporealist, has no need for the entire concept of deism or theism or atheism.

Otherwise, you get stuck in interminable threads like this in which everyboy is likeFrank and find it necessary to explain themselves when Frank could be out cleaning up his back yard from all the winter **** therein, and celebrating the return of life to the winter barren backyards.
Get the hell outside Frank, get some vitamin D

The word "corporialist" is a little obscure, and my quick google search found some discussion about whether God ever takes a coporeal form (apparently there is a theological meaning of the word "corporealist").

I think profane is closest... maybe I am a profanist.

I don't understand how this would ever happen. If you aren't enjoying a thread, why wouldn't you just leave it?

I really oughta, FM. Got most of the leaves up during the Fall...but a lot still are tangled in the forsythia and honeysuckle.

Next week.

Still not warm enough...and Nancy was kind enough to bring a cold home to me from work. I never shoulda bragged that I did not have a single cold this winter.

I suppose I see myself as some sort greater realm believer. There is something out there, greater than me as is evidenced by the simple fact that I cannot do everything (even though I'd often like to).

It is somewhat spiritual based and involves millions of souls as some call them, interacting with one another, learning and sharing what has been picked up on various dwelling spaces throughout the galaxies.

Most of the a2kers I have encountered are profoundly human in the finest sense. You may not prefer to be called humanist or humanitarian but you certainly seem to be of that spirit.

Your denial of spirituality steams perhaps from a certain western vision of what "spirituality" ought to mean in the context of Abrahamic religions...on the other hand do you deny abstract objects ? Just an alternate pov to give some thought into Edgar...

...all phenomenology refers to "spirituality"...and since "subjects" are no more then puppets pulled with abstract strings where the material world is yet another phenomenon..."being there", "perceiving", expressing our identity can be reduced to an abstract system.

I don't doubts abstract systems exist...its a minimalistic approach to phenomenology, to reality itself...on the other hand I find it very hard to explain and describe what materialism amounts to other then an obscure projection of our own pre historic understanding of our world experience...

I used to read Buddhist literature and went to Nicherin meetings. I read Japanese authors in English translation. I have no quarrel with anybody over any of it. It's just not me.

Eastern spirituality works very much the same way that Western spirituality works. They are both created by humans for similar reasons. Spiritual people rely on an "understanding" that is untestable and beyond science, yet they treat it as "truth". This is incorporated into culture and into ideas of right and wrong. Whether this truth is "God" or some state of "being", there isn't much difference.

I don't see any value for myself in spirituality of any kind. I don't mind if other people find value in either God or in "being there"... if it makes someone happy to believe something then I see no reason why they shouldn't believe.

When you use the word 'metaphysics,' is this what you're referring to? http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/metaphysics/

Or do you mean the vernacular connotation of 'woo'?

Please help me with the terminology.

When I used the term metaphysics I am referring to the supernatural. These are the things that are are untestable and beyond the reach of science. These are the things that are fervently believed to be true because they should be true (not because there is any testable reason). I would include in this definition...

- Virtue (in an absolute sense not an anthropological one)
- Human rights (again in an absolute sense).
- God (or gods)
- The human soul.
- A connection between all people, or between all life.
- Enlightenment or Salvation (of any kind)

These are all things that can't be supported by science. In my opinion they are made by humans... they are powerful myths, and perhaps useful myths for a social creature to have, but they are myths none-the-less.

This is what I am trying to get at when I use the words "spiritual" and "metaphysical". I would use the word "religious", but many people who believe in one or more of these things don't consider themselves religious.

So please, what word should I use?

I wouldn't presume to dictate vocabulary to you. I was just curious to know how you're using the word so that I could understand clearly your intended message, rather than making assumptions. My background is in Philosophy, so when I hear the word 'metaphysics,' I think of Aristotle, not Deepak Chopkra.

If someone claims that the things in your list are inherent, incontrovertible, absolute aspects of the universe or reality, then they could be considered as metaphysical speculations in the philosophical sense. But I run across a lot of people who use the word specifically to refer to woo.

I'm not sure how virtue or human rights deserve to be called supernatural, though. Abstract, yes. But supernatural? I'm not following.

Give me an example of something that is supernatural, and then tell me how the idea that humans have intrinsic rights (other than the rights we invented for ourselves) is different.

Is clairvoyance "abstract", or is it "supernatural"?