Spirituality versus Religion - Harris versus Dawkins.

I'm in Dawkins' corner.

I'm not familiar with Harris' thought, and only slightly familiar with that of Dawkins. I think of "spirituality" as a mental perspective that considers "the norm" to be delusional. My understanding of Dawkins is that he is right regarding the "scientific" conflicts between evolutionists and creationists. That's no great achievement, given the absurdity of the creationist and Intelligent Design camp(s).
To my mind, Dawkins' perspective is the counterpart of Christian fundamentalism. It is relatively superficial but on the side of factuality. Spirituality, as I see it, goes beyond the level of simple facts and "ordinary" experience; it includes very subtle relationships and multiple levels of experience. My spirituality is atheistic.
These are clumsy thoughts off the top of my head; I'm hoping to modify them in response to criticisms.

JLN,

You might find this discussion useful re Harris.

http://ravingatheist.com/archives/2004/11/interview_with_sam_harris_part_1.php

I think I'd like to see those two go head-to-head at some point.

What I'd also like to know is....has anyone ever converted out of a habit of meditating?....ie, has anyone who achieved a high level of meditation decided that they were actually deluding themselves? That would carry some weight with me.

I think it's more likely a skill that one can learn.... like riding a monocycle. If you didn't know it was possible, you'd assume it probably wasn't.

JL, looks like Harris might be one of those annoying atheist Buddhist types ! :wink:

The more important question, I think, is whether meditation is spiritual or self-reflective.

A large portion of my life I have been the type of person that has meditated. I grew up as a Christian, went to the Christian summer camps, and various other things. Meditation wasn't something I was taught but I always felt like doing it as I aged more and more. I meditated almost daily when I was 11 years old. I didn't consider meditation to be a spiritual event at this point in time. Around 12 or 13 I began practicing martial arts (Taekwondo) and meditation was a large part of that. Around 18 I stopped learning martial arts and became much more interested in philosophy and eventually started to distrust my belief that Christianity was true. After a while, I quit being a Christian and was a Negative Atheist. (Many would call the fence-sitting "Agnosticism" but I do not.)

I didn't like being without a belief in something supernatural or mysticism. I didn't think like that consciously but subonciously I felt like I was in an entirely different country without an Atlas to tell me where to go. I started to research Buddhism, Theosophy, and many other things and I settled with Theosophy since I found it the most pleasing, being a mixture of esoteric mysticism and philosophy. Meditation was still a large part of my life at that time, as one would expect from a Theosophist. Theosophy had changed my view on meditation though, as I began to see it as a spiritual experience--much like Harris described on the Raving Atheist web page linked to earlier. Through meditation, though, I eventually realized that I was pushing myself back into the state of delusion I was in before. I dropped Theosophy at this point, quit looking at meditation as a spiritual experience, and became a Negative Atheist again.

I still meditated, of course, but it wasn't a spiritual experience anymore. I began to read more philosophy, science, and history. When learning about philosophical principles I began to think about how society worked and I realized many things. It was intriguing to look at religious beliefs as an outsider. Many people were afraid of reflection and become locked into their way of thinking, much like I would've been if I had remained a Christian. As time passed, my Atheism had solidified and I began to realize the problems that religion has brought upon society. At this point my Atheism was solidified and I began turning towards Militant Atheism (also called Anti-Theism.)

I don't meditate so much anymore. I still do it once every few weeks or so. I am quite content with my current mental state so meditation doesn't seem as necessary. Every once in a while I am confronted with a situation that shakes me and I will meditate on it. For example, a year ago I was dating a woman who had two children. Consciously I thought I was okay with the situation but subconsciously I was not. I began to have nightmares and at the time I had no idea what they were about. I meditated on the nightmares and came to the realization that I simply wasn't ready to take care of children. I drove to the local library and got some parenting books and read everything I could and I began applying what I had learned. After a few weeks the nightmares went away. I am no longer with the woman but that was an enlightening time of my life. It is only when I am faced with new situations that discomfort me that I meditate anymore.

Anyways, I felt like giving a little history lesson about myself since it related to the current discussion. I do not view meditation as a spiritual experience. I have not meditated so long that I think meditation itself is worthless, though I do think going too far with the practice can be worthless. I think Harris' concept of it, such as finding the self behind the self, is worthless. Meditation is, to me, a reduction of chaos that allows me to think clearly of how I should place the peices together that form the puzzle of life.

meagaman,

Thanks for sharing that comprehensive personal account. Your division between "spiritual" and "self reflective" seems useful.

The experience of meditational exercises as "problem dissipating" is familiar to me and I interpret this as letting go of the "the self" for whom "the problem" exists. Then intellectually there is a move which sees all existence as relational. This would include the existence of any category we called "scientific" like genes or neurons which leads me to question Dawkins reliance on them as a firm base. So it follows that whatever aspect of my consciousnes "sees" this issue appears to transcend everyday rationality. In this sense I must agree with Harris with the proviso that the label "spirituality" applied to this transcendent state seems to have moralistic implications about which I feel ambiguous. (examples from Buddhism "right thinking" or from systems theory "deep ecology")

Eori, as I understand meditation--which I have done "religously" for thirty years--one of its principal functions is to reveal to us, or remind us of, the delusional nature of life as we normally live it. This includes the notion of the "spirituality" of meditation. I see it as a form of mental (spiritual?) hygiene. I do not use it as Megaman does, to reflect on problems occurring in the "normal" biographical realm of life. As Fresco suggests, it exposes the unreality of ego and the processual and relational nature of Reality, i.e., that it has no fixed "things" and "beings" (including egoselves), only relational processes.

There is a wonderful feeling of freedom in this sense of all things being empty of essence, of being ephemeral becomings. An important point to be made is that meditation, as I know it, does not generate "beliefs" that, once generated, become a permanent state of my mentality. Meditation helps me to maintain that perspective. If I stop for an extended time, I lose the perspective at the level of feeling even though I proclaim it at the intellectual level of belief. Perhaps it's more accurate to descrbe meditation as nutrition rather than medicine.
I suspect, from what has been said here, that Harris' views are similar. I shall read the link after my morning walk--another form of daily hygiene.

For me I'd have to say that spirituality is connecting with your conscience, what you believe is right and wrong and how it defines who you are. Scripture may speak to your conscience helping to clarify your beliefs.

Or scripture could have the effect of making you think you are right in your convictions.....even when you are not. Without validation of the scripture itself, how can you use it validate anything else?

Scripture isn't the only thing that speaks to conscience .
When you apply scripture to your life such as "love thy neighbor" you can measure it's effects- Maybe you stop punching your kid sister in the nose and she is happier.
In the bible we are told to love our neighbors as ourselves because most people know how they want to be treated well or what to them is considered "good" treatment of people. Of course that's no guarantee people will act in a "good" manner or even know for certain what good is.
People are not perfect. I suppose because of our imperfections you can never be absolutely right in your own convictions. Perhaps that is why the bible tells us not to judge, but to walk humbly. As to whether we can determine what consistutes the ultimate goodness or 'right'ness- if such a thing were possible, the bible seems to say that only God can judge. What God does is, he forgives.
I think validation, to some extent, can be seen in a changed life. What would you hold scripture up to in order to validate it/ deem it right?