I hate religion. I hate ““spirituality”” (what does that even mean?). It makes my skin crawl. I hate that people willfully delude themselves into believing things that they clearly know to not be true, on some level, and then argue wholeheartedly for their actual truthfulness. It’s the most nonsensical practice I can imagine someone engaging in and I struggle to see people who do so as willful, rational human beings. How could they be? Just look at all the people in this thread searching for one that "speaks to them as if they can just pick the nature of reality out for themselves. How in the world can people do that and not make themselves crazy with cognitive dissonance?
BUT. What I do understand is that people are searching for structure, community and a sense of reverence towards… something. There have been attempts at replicating that experience sans-nonsense, really just worshiping the world itself, the universe, things that are objectively real, but every time it’s tried it’s mostly ridiculed and laughed at by the sort of jackass atheists who can’t even empathize with that longing. It’s sad.
The broadest answers to that question are Humanism and Scientific Pantheism, which I’m partial to. That’s what a lot of atheists have made a whole lot of fun of.
Of course humanism is still sort of opposed to what I’m talking about in thr second paragraph, or at least most humanists would be, as far as I’m aware. And most “earth religions” fall under some form of what I’d call spirituality.
In the U.S., at least, I’ve started attending my very local Unitarian Universalist church and I think they’re your best actual practical bet. As much as I whine about most religion, I deeply respect the UU’s commitment to include everyone, atheists included, and so I do my best to respect what people believe and what they want to talk about (which naturally doesn’t usually involve trying to convert people). Third spaces are too important to keep people out because of some sense of sectarianism.
And, of course, Buddhism is at it’s heart a very skeptical religion to the point that some interpret more as a philosophy, which is how I choose to see it, and it’s a philosophy and a practice that modern psychology owes a whole lot to (and should probably yank even more from). It’s literally just a framework of how to stop “suffering” and live a good life regardless of whether it seems like a good life externally. I do mostly stick to more secularized, almost new-age interpretations of it, I love the blog Deconstructing Yourself for being thoroughly dedicated to “Nondualism” while rejecting the schizo craziness it usually brings with it. But I like to learn from something closer to primary sources, too…
For which I’m relying on the Buddhist University. Of the two “original” explicitly supernatural elements of Buddhism, reincarnation was an assumption of the culture the Buddha was born into, and with that stripped away, Karma as cause and effect is just determinism without any “you’re screwed because your past self screwed up”. The second chapter of What the Buddha Taught (which is a great book) practically made me a Buddhist by illuminating just how dedicated the Buddha was to making sure people actually remained skeptical of him, only searching for what they could personally prove not really caring whether something was his idea or anyone else’s. This is a quote (supposedly from him, not that it matters) that sums it up:
Yes, Kālāmas, it is proper that you have doubt, that you have perplexity, for a doubt has arisen in a matter which is doubtful. Now, look you Kālāmas, do not be led by reports, or tradition, or hearsay. Be not led by the authority of religious texts, nor by mere logic or inference, nor by considering appearances, nor the delight in speculative opinions, nor by seeming possibilities, nor by the idea: “this is our teacher”. But, O Kālāmas, when you know for yourselves that certain things are unwholesome, and wrong, and bad, then give them up… And when you know for yourselves that certain things are wholesome and good, then accept them and follow them.
There’s also a story about him telling off one of his followers for insisting that he reveal the “mysteries of the universe”. He was pretty much like look, you’re being a dumbass, that’s won’t help you live well, that’s not important." I can respect that.
spirituality, as i understand it, tends to be more mindful/spiritual practices minus any typically associated religious aspects. for example, meditating and yoga would be typical examples of this, but i think spirituality can also be watching the sun rise/set, going for a walk in the woods, or taking a hot bath. anything that can help bring you to a more peaceful place of self reflection and introspection could be considered spiritual in my opinion.
how can you say that you hate that while not even knowing what it is?
I do all of those things. I choose not to call them spiritual because to a lot of people, spirituality implies a belief in the supernatural, spirits, some nonsense about vibrations, etc.
What you’re describing is just self-care and self-administrated mental health practices.
i don’t really think you get to label others’ experiences ;) imo these experiences tend to feel different to me- more checking in with my physical, mental, and emotional health, as well as feeling connected to the earth and environment around me. that’s what makes them spiritual to me personally- they just feel like more than a regular walk in the woods or hot bath. it’s like i’m connecting with something deeper inside myself and in the world itself.
Well, yes, they’re certainly more than a regular walk in the woods or a bath, which is why I said self-administered mental health practices. Meditation be like that. Still no spirits involved, which is what the word spiritual implies.
i feel like the spirit involved is my own, hence why i would consider it spirituality. but it doesn’t look like this is going anywhere though, so i hope you have a lovely day :)
I hate religion. I hate ““spirituality”” (what does that even mean?). It makes my skin crawl. I hate that people willfully delude themselves into believing things that they clearly know to not be true, on some level, and then argue wholeheartedly for their actual truthfulness. It’s the most nonsensical practice I can imagine someone engaging in and I struggle to see people who do so as willful, rational human beings. How could they be? Just look at all the people in this thread searching for one that "speaks to them as if they can just pick the nature of reality out for themselves. How in the world can people do that and not make themselves crazy with cognitive dissonance?
BUT. What I do understand is that people are searching for structure, community and a sense of reverence towards… something. There have been attempts at replicating that experience sans-nonsense, really just worshiping the world itself, the universe, things that are objectively real, but every time it’s tried it’s mostly ridiculed and laughed at by the sort of jackass atheists who can’t even empathize with that longing. It’s sad.
I’m very curious to hear about the attempts you’re referencing in your second paragraph!
Sorry I didn’t get to this comment earlier!
The broadest answers to that question are Humanism and Scientific Pantheism, which I’m partial to. That’s what a lot of atheists have made a whole lot of fun of.
Of course humanism is still sort of opposed to what I’m talking about in thr second paragraph, or at least most humanists would be, as far as I’m aware. And most “earth religions” fall under some form of what I’d call spirituality.
In the U.S., at least, I’ve started attending my very local Unitarian Universalist church and I think they’re your best actual practical bet. As much as I whine about most religion, I deeply respect the UU’s commitment to include everyone, atheists included, and so I do my best to respect what people believe and what they want to talk about (which naturally doesn’t usually involve trying to convert people). Third spaces are too important to keep people out because of some sense of sectarianism.
And, of course, Buddhism is at it’s heart a very skeptical religion to the point that some interpret more as a philosophy, which is how I choose to see it, and it’s a philosophy and a practice that modern psychology owes a whole lot to (and should probably yank even more from). It’s literally just a framework of how to stop “suffering” and live a good life regardless of whether it seems like a good life externally. I do mostly stick to more secularized, almost new-age interpretations of it, I love the blog Deconstructing Yourself for being thoroughly dedicated to “Nondualism” while rejecting the schizo craziness it usually brings with it. But I like to learn from something closer to primary sources, too…
For which I’m relying on the Buddhist University. Of the two “original” explicitly supernatural elements of Buddhism, reincarnation was an assumption of the culture the Buddha was born into, and with that stripped away, Karma as cause and effect is just determinism without any “you’re screwed because your past self screwed up”. The second chapter of What the Buddha Taught (which is a great book) practically made me a Buddhist by illuminating just how dedicated the Buddha was to making sure people actually remained skeptical of him, only searching for what they could personally prove not really caring whether something was his idea or anyone else’s. This is a quote (supposedly from him, not that it matters) that sums it up:
There’s also a story about him telling off one of his followers for insisting that he reveal the “mysteries of the universe”. He was pretty much like look, you’re being a dumbass, that’s won’t help you live well, that’s not important." I can respect that.
spirituality, as i understand it, tends to be more mindful/spiritual practices minus any typically associated religious aspects. for example, meditating and yoga would be typical examples of this, but i think spirituality can also be watching the sun rise/set, going for a walk in the woods, or taking a hot bath. anything that can help bring you to a more peaceful place of self reflection and introspection could be considered spiritual in my opinion.
how can you say that you hate that while not even knowing what it is?
I do all of those things. I choose not to call them spiritual because to a lot of people, spirituality implies a belief in the supernatural, spirits, some nonsense about vibrations, etc.
What you’re describing is just self-care and self-administrated mental health practices.
i don’t really think you get to label others’ experiences ;) imo these experiences tend to feel different to me- more checking in with my physical, mental, and emotional health, as well as feeling connected to the earth and environment around me. that’s what makes them spiritual to me personally- they just feel like more than a regular walk in the woods or hot bath. it’s like i’m connecting with something deeper inside myself and in the world itself.
Well, yes, they’re certainly more than a regular walk in the woods or a bath, which is why I said self-administered mental health practices. Meditation be like that. Still no spirits involved, which is what the word spiritual implies.
i feel like the spirit involved is my own, hence why i would consider it spirituality. but it doesn’t look like this is going anywhere though, so i hope you have a lovely day :)