A Definition Of Spirituality

[mikey101]

 

 

 

Doctors are talking about yoga, meditation and eating grass now. Hugging trees isn't just for quacks anymore, Everyone's on weed and Ayahuasca.  New Age is infiltrating Western science.  Our grandchildren will be talking about recent discovery of garden gnomes.

New  Age is infiltrating Western science? Not if I can help it, lol.

 

See the thread Pseudoscience is Not Science for more information.

 

Wasn't talking about pseudoscience. Also, use of the word infiltrating wasn't meant to be taken literal.  Nothing's being infiltrated, as far as I know.  

 

Sometimes I really struggle to understand your posts.

 

The reason I mentioned that thread was to save myself the trouble of writing a whole paragraph to explain that many of us care very much about things like evidence-based medicine and will do everything we can to stop unscientific crap getting any airtime.  That is all.

 

Western medicine is not the only healing system rooted in science. Medical systems from other cultures, including those of India and China, have used natural treatments for centuries, some of which are now directly influencing our own health-care professions. 

 

Unfortunately it's not just crap anymore.

[FreeThinkerNZ]

 

 

 

 

Doctors are talking about yoga, meditation and eating grass now. Hugging trees isn't just for quacks anymore, Everyone's on weed and Ayahuasca.  New Age is infiltrating Western science.  Our grandchildren will be talking about recent discovery of garden gnomes.

New  Age is infiltrating Western science? Not if I can help it, lol.

 

See the thread Pseudoscience is Not Science for more information.

 

Wasn't talking about pseudoscience. Also, use of the word infiltrating wasn't meant to be taken literal.  Nothing's being infiltrated, as far as I know.  

 

Sometimes I really struggle to understand your posts.

 

The reason I mentioned that thread was to save myself the trouble of writing a whole paragraph to explain that many of us care very much about things like evidence-based medicine and will do everything we can to stop unscientific crap getting any airtime.  That is all.

 

Western medicine is not the only healing system rooted in science. Medical systems from other cultures, including those of India and China, have used natural treatments for centuries, some of which are now directly influencing our own health-care professions. 

 

Unfortunately it's not just crap anymore.

 

Supposed treatments that have not undergone testing such as double blind randomised controlled trials had better not be influencing licensed medical practitioners, or there will be legal and professional consequences.  Patients have a right to treatments that have been proven safe and effective.  Anything less is unacceptable.  Crap is still crap, lol.

[mikey101]

Supposed treatments that have not undergone testing such as double blind randomised controlled trials had better not be influencing licensed medical practitioners, or there will be legal and professional consequences.  Patients have a right to treatments that have been proven safe and effective.  Anything less is unacceptable.  Crap is still crap, lol.

 

 

I guess there will be legal consequences then.  I hurt myself doing yoga once cause I didn't really know what I was doing.  Meditating while driving is probably not a good idea.

[FreeThinkerNZ]

 

Supposed treatments that have not undergone testing such as double blind randomised controlled trials had better not be influencing licensed medical practitioners, or there will be legal and professional consequences.  Patients have a right to treatments that have been proven safe and effective.  Anything less is unacceptable.  Crap is still crap, lol.

 

 

I guess there will be legal consequences then.  I hurt myself doing yoga once cause I didn't really know what I was doing.  Meditating while driving is probably not a good idea.

 

But you're not talking about yoga and meditation, are you Mikey?  You're talking about herbal "treatments" for diabetes and exploring the impacts of "spirituality" on bipolar disorder.  Laws about health care exist for a reason. 

 

http://www.thegreatcourses.com/courses/the-science-of-natural-healing.html

[mikey101]

 

 

Supposed treatments that have not undergone testing such as double blind randomised controlled trials had better not be influencing licensed medical practitioners, or there will be legal and professional consequences.  Patients have a right to treatments that have been proven safe and effective.  Anything less is unacceptable.  Crap is still crap, lol.

 

 

I guess there will be legal consequences then.  I hurt myself doing yoga once cause I didn't really know what I was doing.  Meditating while driving is probably not a good idea.

 

But you're not talking about yoga and meditation, are you Mikey?  You're talking about herbal "treatments" for diabetes and exploring the impacts of "spirituality" on bipolar disorder.  Laws about health care exist for a reason. 

 

http://www.thegreatcourses.com/courses/the-science-of-natural-healing.html

 

I think it's called integrative medicine. It's not taking over traditional Western medicine or anything though.  I wouldn't worry about it.  

 

My comment about the tree huggers and all that was tongue-in-cheek, just kind of how part of me feels about all this 'spirituality' becoming popular these days.

[florduh]

There seems to be a demand for "alternative" treatments since classical Western medicine doesn't yet have all the answers and sometimes it fails to cure. Smart doctors, such as mine, have found ways to incorporate alternatives in conjunction with real medicine.

 

My doctor is Chinese, though born in Canada. His father was a traditional Chinese healer who used classical Chinese methods. My doctor has started offering the services of an acupuncturist and will provide safe supplements to those who believe such things will help them. I think it's helpful to a lot of people, it's good business, and it may even prevent some from seeking out quacks who can offer no real medical expertise or real medicine when needed. My brother, sister and their spouses have used the acupuncture offered at his office and they swear by it. However, the doc told me with a wink that acupuncture probably wouldn't work for me. 

[FreeThinkerNZ]

 

 

 

Supposed treatments that have not undergone testing such as double blind randomised controlled trials had better not be influencing licensed medical practitioners, or there will be legal and professional consequences.  Patients have a right to treatments that have been proven safe and effective.  Anything less is unacceptable.  Crap is still crap, lol.

 

 

I guess there will be legal consequences then.  I hurt myself doing yoga once cause I didn't really know what I was doing.  Meditating while driving is probably not a good idea.

 

But you're not talking about yoga and meditation, are you Mikey?  You're talking about herbal "treatments" for diabetes and exploring the impacts of "spirituality" on bipolar disorder.  Laws about health care exist for a reason. 

 

http://www.thegreatcourses.com/courses/the-science-of-natural-healing.html

 

I think it's called integrative medicine. It's not taking over traditional Western medicine or anything though.  I wouldn't worry about it.  

 

What I and many others "worry about" is the lack of critical thinking employed by people who believe in unsafe and ineffective "integrative"/alternative/pseudoscience/quackery who end up using these products instead of proven treatments, and suffering the ill-effects.  Of course it's not "taking over" scientific medicine, because enough of us are still using our critical thinking skills.  

 

It's true that scientific medicine is not 100% effective, but that is no reason to risk unsafe and ineffective "treatments".  Courses like "The science of natural healing" and the products they promote are just a cynical attempt at wresting money from the hands of the gullible and the desperate.  It's shameful.

[Leo]

BTW guys, Christians claim they are not religious, Christianity is a relationship not a religion.

I think anyone can claim they're not religious.

I do tend to feel like what FTNZ is talking about ... somehow more awake now, not paralyzed anymore by trying to uphold the cognitive dissonance. I describe my Christian experience of the past 15 years to be something like sleep paralysis, if you have ever had that. Not quite awake, but knowing you're asleep and can sort of hear things around you, and yet you can't seem to move or wake up.

This paralysis is gone now. I don't see evidence for god or gods but I really do appreciate the universe we have. Yu look at the world very differently and far less nihilistically when you can just see it as is, no dogma from Christinsanity about how wrecked it is.

[Deva]

I think the chief difference being out of Christianity is that I don't make snap judgments about people as much as I used to. Christianity is very exclusive.

Religion is composed of symbols and the particular set of symbols that comprised Christianity did not work for me anymore, so I exercised my option to choose others that worked better.

[mikey101]

 

 

 

 

Supposed treatments that have not undergone testing such as double blind randomised controlled trials had better not be influencing licensed medical practitioners, or there will be legal and professional consequences.  Patients have a right to treatments that have been proven safe and effective.  Anything less is unacceptable.  Crap is still crap, lol.

 

 

I guess there will be legal consequences then.  I hurt myself doing yoga once cause I didn't really know what I was doing.  Meditating while driving is probably not a good idea.

 

But you're not talking about yoga and meditation, are you Mikey?  You're talking about herbal "treatments" for diabetes and exploring the impacts of "spirituality" on bipolar disorder.  Laws about health care exist for a reason. 

 

http://www.thegreatcourses.com/courses/the-science-of-natural-healing.html

 

I think it's called integrative medicine. It's not taking over traditional Western medicine or anything though.  I wouldn't worry about it.  

 

What I and many others "worry about" is the lack of critical thinking employed by people who believe in unsafe and ineffective "integrative"/alternative/pseudoscience/quackery who end up using these products instead of proven treatments, and suffering the ill-effects.  Of course it's not "taking over" scientific medicine, because enough of us are still using our critical thinking skills.  

 

It's true that scientific medicine is not 100% effective, but that is no reason to risk unsafe and ineffective "treatments".  Courses like "The science of natural healing" and the products they promote are just a cynical attempt at wresting money from the hands of the gullible and the desperate.  It's shameful.

 

Yes I think there's plenty of quakery but personally I don't see anything wrong with trying some natural things.  I can't speak for someone who harms themselves by not seeing a doctor.  Right now I'm just trying to get healthier. I like that the course has several sections on food because I've been changing my diet.   I don't think the course is quakery, TTC isn't really about quakery.

[FreeThinkerNZ]

 

 

 

 

 

Supposed treatments that have not undergone testing such as double blind randomised controlled trials had better not be influencing licensed medical practitioners, or there will be legal and professional consequences.  Patients have a right to treatments that have been proven safe and effective.  Anything less is unacceptable.  Crap is still crap, lol.

 

 

I guess there will be legal consequences then.  I hurt myself doing yoga once cause I didn't really know what I was doing.  Meditating while driving is probably not a good idea.

 

But you're not talking about yoga and meditation, are you Mikey?  You're talking about herbal "treatments" for diabetes and exploring the impacts of "spirituality" on bipolar disorder.  Laws about health care exist for a reason. 

 

http://www.thegreatcourses.com/courses/the-science-of-natural-healing.html

 

I think it's called integrative medicine. It's not taking over traditional Western medicine or anything though.  I wouldn't worry about it.  

 

What I and many others "worry about" is the lack of critical thinking employed by people who believe in unsafe and ineffective "integrative"/alternative/pseudoscience/quackery who end up using these products instead of proven treatments, and suffering the ill-effects.  Of course it's not "taking over" scientific medicine, because enough of us are still using our critical thinking skills.  

 

It's true that scientific medicine is not 100% effective, but that is no reason to risk unsafe and ineffective "treatments".  Courses like "The science of natural healing" and the products they promote are just a cynical attempt at wresting money from the hands of the gullible and the desperate.  It's shameful.

 

Yes I think there's plenty of quakery but personally I don't see anything wrong with trying some natural things.  I can't speak for someone who harms themselves by not seeing a doctor.  Right now I'm just trying to get healthier. I like that the course has several sections on food because I've been changing my diet.   I don't think the course is quakery, TTC isn't really about quakery.

 

If you want to spend money on stuff like that it's your choice.  I could take the course apart and show all the ways it's quackery but really I just can't be bothered.

[mikey101]

 

If you want to spend money on stuff like that it's your choice.  I could take the course apart and show all the ways it's quackery but really I just can't be bothered.

 

 

If it is the TTC has really gone downhill.  No I don't buy 1s and 0s. I've been around computers a long time lol.  But still the great courses are a pretty good deal now considering they used to be hundreds of dollars each.

 

Interesting, I just found that Yale joined the Consortium of Academic Health Centers for Integrative Medicine in 2006. and teach it at the Yale school of medicine. Harvard is a member also.

[Ellinas]

The more I've thought about this the more I am forced to conclude that I must be:

1. Suspicious of those who claim to be "spiritual"
2. Extremely suspicious of those who claim to be "enlightened"

In the end, those who have a worthwhile level of spirituality will be aware of their own limitations and have the humility to make few, if any, such claims.

And that suggests to me that knowing your own limitations and acting accordingly may be as good a definition of spirituality as any.

[Cousin Ricky]

The more I've thought about this the more I am forced to conclude that I must be:

1. Suspicious of those who claim to be "spiritual"
2. Extremely suspicious of those who claim to be "enlightened"

 

This reminds me of an old saying (which can serve as a creed for agnosticism): Seek those who search for the truth. Run away from those who claim to have found it.

[mikey101]

The more I've thought about this the more I am forced to conclude that I must be:

1. Suspicious of those who claim to be "spiritual"
2. Extremely suspicious of those who claim to be "enlightened"

In the end, those who have a worthwhile level of spirituality will be aware of their own limitations and have the humility to make few, if any, such claims.

And that suggests to me that knowing your own limitations and acting accordingly may be as good a definition of spirituality as any.

I'm suspicious of people that say they're 'spiritual, not religious'.  If you have to make a point of 'not' being like your fellow human being who follows a religion in much the same way you follow your spiritual belief system, I wonder how 'spiritual' you actually are.  Seems to me spirituality should be about unity rather than division.

 

The reaction is usually 'they follow doctrines and dogma, I don't.'  Well,  a doctrine is simply a belief/philosophy/idea relating to the spiritual, like belief in a true self or universal spirit of love for example.  And dogma is being sure that your beliefs are true.  I don't really see a big difference.  

[Ellinas]

 

The more I've thought about this the more I am forced to conclude that I must be:

1. Suspicious of those who claim to be "spiritual"
2. Extremely suspicious of those who claim to be "enlightened"

 

This reminds me of an old saying (which can serve as a creed for agnosticism): Seek those who search for the truth. Run away from those who claim to have found it.

 

 

An old saying with which I have much sympathy.

 

As to the "spiritual, not religious" claim, that is a statement which begs the question "why do you feel the need to claim not to be religious?"  After all - Christianity is "a relationship rather than a religion".  Apparently...

[Orbit]

I'm tired of the spirituality-bashing. Spirituality is important to me, and as I've said before, it's not a contest to see who is more spiritual. I really dislike the straw man that is being built here.

[mikey101]

I'm tired of the spirituality-bashing. Spirituality is important to me, and as I've said before, it's not a contest to see who is more spiritual. I really dislike the straw man that is being built here.

I don't think I'm bashing spirituality but rather raising questions that may lead to having a more honest spirituality. To me things like honesty with one's self and eliminating divisions between people would lead to more depth in one's path.

 

I'm interested in spirituality too but the idea of thinking I'm more spiritual than 'them' (the religious) turns my stomach.  That's the exact same thing I deconverted from. I'm not going back to the same kind of thinking people had in the abusive environment I was in. I'm not saying you are like that, I just don't think it's a taboo subject to discuss.

 

It seems popular today to define personal spirituality by the people they are 'not' like.  Even the popular Eckhart Tolle seems to say that (other) religions are just hinting at what 'we' have.  I don't hear much in my society about defining personal spirituality by non-judgment. I completely understand wanting to compare myself to others, it's just I think spirituality as something different than that, than the everyday vicious cycle. 

[Orbit]

 

I'm tired of the spirituality-bashing. Spirituality is important to me, and as I've said before, it's not a contest to see who is more spiritual. I really dislike the straw man that is being built here.

I don't think I'm bashing spirituality but rather raising questions that may lead to having a more honest spirituality. To me things like honesty with one's self and eliminating divisions between people would lead to more depth in one's path.

 

I'm interested in spirituality too but the idea of thinking I'm more spiritual than 'them' (the religious) turns my stomach.  That's the exact same thing I deconverted from. I'm not going back to the same kind of thinking people had in the abusive environment I was in. I'm not saying you are like that, I just don't think it's a taboo subject to discuss.

 

It seems popular today to define personal spirituality by the people they are 'not' like.  Even the popular Eckhart Tolle seems to say that (other) religions are just hinting at what 'we' have.  I don't hear much in my society about defining personal spirituality by non-judgment of others.  

 

I didn't say it's taboo to discuss. But I think the concern is misplaced here on ExC. I have never seen anyone on ExC saying they were more spiritual than someone else.

[mikey101]

I didn't say it's taboo to discuss. But I think the concern is misplaced here on ExC. I have never seen anyone on ExC saying they were more spiritual than someone else.

 

I haven't, but I wonder if it can even be avoid in the first place. 

[Orbit]

 

I didn't say it's taboo to discuss. But I think the concern is misplaced here on ExC. I have never seen anyone on ExC saying they were more spiritual than someone else.

I haven't, but I wonder if it can even be avoid in the first place.

 

What do you mean? Do you think spirituality is automatically a negative thing, because you associate it with religion?

[mikey101]

 

 

I didn't say it's taboo to discuss. But I think the concern is misplaced here on ExC. I have never seen anyone on ExC saying they were more spiritual than someone else.

I haven't, but I wonder if it can even be avoid in the first place.

 

What do you mean? Do you think spirituality is automatically a negative thing, because you associate it with religion?

 

It wasn't long ago that spirituality and religion were thought of as the same. It was just called religion.  Today popular beliefs like true self, the now, ego reincarnation, energy healing, etc  would usually be categorized as religious belief in academics.  New Age is more like a personal religion, separate from traditional religion.  Today's 'spirituality' used to be categorized as part of the New Age religious movement and still is sometimes for reference.  

 

I don't think it's negative, there are always both positives and negatives to things, but I would want to keep critical thinking close at hand since there's no organization or rules, basically anyone can make up anything or start a practice. 

 

Humans compare themselves to each other to create identity, for example with other countries, races, and religions.  As an ex-fundamentalist.Christian and having spent a little time dabbling in spirituality, I've seen both sides see the other negatively. The right side is the one your on.  One see themselves as being farther along, more mature in their personal development. For example, going from Christianity to spirituality.  But it's funny.. the other guy is thinking the exact same thing, except he's the one that's farther along    

[Orbit]

 

 

 

I didn't say it's taboo to discuss. But I think the concern is misplaced here on ExC. I have never seen anyone on ExC saying they were more spiritual than someone else.

I haven't, but I wonder if it can even be avoid in the first place.

 

What do you mean? Do you think spirituality is automatically a negative thing, because you associate it with religion?

 

It wasn't long ago that spirituality and religion were thought of as the same. It was just called religion.  Today popular beliefs like true self, the now, ego reincarnation, energy healing, etc  would usually be categorized as religious belief in academics.  New Age is more like a personal religion, separate from traditional religion.  Today's 'spirituality' used to be categorized as part of the New Age religious movement and still is sometimes for reference.  

 

I don't think it's negative, there are always both positives and negatives to things, but I would want to keep critical thinking close at hand since there's no organization or rules, basically anyone can make up anything or start a practice. 

 

Humans compare themselves to each other to create identity, for example with other countries, races, and religions.  As an ex-fundamentalist.Christian and having spent a little time dabbling in spirituality, I've seen both sides see the other negatively. The right side is the one your on.  One see themselves as being farther along, more mature in their personal development. For example, going from Christianity to spirituality.  But it's funny.. the other guy is thinking the exact same thing, except he's the one that's farther along    

 

I'm sorry that has been your experience. Don't mistake it for everything that's out there.

[mikey101]

I'm sorry that has been your experience. Don't mistake it for everything that's out there.

 

 

So are you saying that the idea of going from Christianity to spirituality as progress is just my experience?  As someone spiritual, surely you see going from Evangelical Christian belief to spirituality as a good thing.

[Orbit]

 

I'm sorry that has been your experience. Don't mistake it for everything that's out there.

 

So are you saying that the idea of going from Christianity to spirituality as progress is just my experience?  As someone spiritual, surely you see going from Evangelical Christian belief to spirituality as a good thing.

 

As long as no dogma is involved, I'm all for it.