What Is Your New Spirituality?

[DesertBob]

People do indeed suffer in this world and it's an awful thing. But we can also overestimate their suffering when we don't understand the details of their lives, their cultures and their experiences.

 

Just food for thought.

That is a very good point, Vigile. I do understand the principle that you can't bemoan what you don't even know. That's just the hierarchy of needs. Also, even I would probably rationalize wallowing amidst the water buffalo dung if I had satisfying relationships to support thereby; they may not know the physical ease of the west but they may well not know its alienation, either. Still, a major social problem in Vietnam is the droves of young people looking for a better life in urban areas and ending up as bums or criminals because they don't have the education and skills to survive there. They are probably getting just enough of a glimpse of what is possible that they can no longer accept the destiny of a rice farmer. This drives home the point that while living a very limited, ignorant existence is one way to be philosophical about the challenges of life, it doesn't change the fact that they are objectively challenges.

 

One could even argue that just as I may lack perspective that allows a rice farmer to be content with his existence, he may lack perspective that would allow him to know what is possible and that he can better himself, and how to go about it.

 

At one point in an excursion a wisp of a woman poled all four of us plus our guide on a flatboat, one hour up and one hour down a river to and from our destination in 95 degree heat. Our guide explained that she had gotten up at 4 am and worked for 3 hours in the rice fields while the sun was low, then spent the day rowing us and waiting for us for the return trip, for whatever amount of money the tour company paid her; then, back to the rice fields at dusk and then collecting duck eggs -- and 3 days a week, somewhere in there, fitting in a visit to the market to sell said eggs. Rinse and repeat. Whether this was overstated to elicit my sympathy or not, I said, screw it, and gave her 200,000 dong as a tip -- about $10 US or over three days wages to her. She nearly cried with gratitude -- the guide told me later, she said not so much about the money as that she was not invisible to us and that she was appreciated.

 

Don't tell me that after she has this experience a few times she and her compatriots will figure out a few things: she should be getting paid more by the tour company; many of her customers are self-absorbed prigs; there is a whole world and existence out there that she is unaware of. Probably all I did for her was plant the seeds of realizing how hideous her life actually is.

 

I've seen the same thing with Indian software developers. They work for a tenth to a twentieth of what I command in the US. But the smart ones figure out they are being exploited as such. If I'm worth $100 an hour and they can do the same work, they might as well find a sponsor in the US by hook or by crook and come over here and find a way to get permanent resident status and work for the same wages I do. And the cream of the crop do exactly that.

 

A recruiter from Mumbai that I met once said these young tech workers who take our tech support calls in the US, those annoying ones who work off a decision tree / cheat sheet and don't actually know a thing, likely are only months away from living on their Uncle's chicken farm, and have barely discovered underarm deodorant, but they are on the beginning of a long climb upward. Clearly, there is some impulse behind that -- I doubt most of them end up wistful for the hinterlands they left behind, other than maybe sending $$ back to mom and dad.

[Vigile]

One could even argue that just as I may lack perspective that allows a rice farmer to be content with his existence, he may lack perspective that would allow him to know what is possible and that he can better himself, and how to go about it.

 

Absolutely. This could probably be said of all of us too.

 

I have to wonder though, which are the unlucky ones? The ones stuck in the rice fields not knowing more is out there, or the kids who got a taste of MTV and are now bumming around Hanoi? This is not a rhetorical question.

[Ro-bear]

I think spirituality is feel-good bunkum. We are our bodies; when they are gone, we are gone. What some perceive as their spirits are just neurons firing across synapses.

[DesertBob]

One could even argue that just as I may lack perspective that allows a rice farmer to be content with his existence, he may lack perspective that would allow him to know what is possible and that he can better himself, and how to go about it.

 

Absolutely. This could probably be said of all of us too.

 

I have to wonder though, which are the unlucky ones? The ones stuck in the rice fields not knowing more is out there, or the kids who got a taste of MTV and are now bumming around Hanoi? This is not a rhetorical question.

My take on it is that at least in this age, where there is at minimum a communal satellite TV available for most anyone to watch, there is no such thing as a rice farmer who is unaware that he or she is working ten times as hard for one twentieth the wage of zillions of other people in the world. S/he may look at a commercial for hair conditioner and rationalize that it's silly and unnecessary and irrelevant, but they also sense that people who care about such things are much farther up the hierarchy of needs and at least they have the OPTION to be vapid if they so choose. That has to weigh on the most Zen of them.

 

This is also not a rhetorical observation: within the next generation, there will no longer be anyone to speak of on this planet who does not know the Big Picture. That is part of the impulse behind things like the "Arab spring", which is simply a relatively more benign outcome than what came immediately before, and may yet come after, which is, providing lots of easy recruiting for the likes of Al Quaida. The world will have to deal with vast oceans of impoverished kids who are looking for their piece of the dream that is no longer uniquely American, and the sociopaths who are willing to manipulate them to become roving gangs of disaffected and hopeless and violent, angry people with nothing to lose.

[DesertBob]

I think spirituality is feel-good bunkum. We are our bodies; when they are gone, we are gone. What some perceive as their spirits are just neurons firing across synapses.

As one Robert to another, I don't know that I disagree anymore as such with your statement, but whether or not there's ultimately a purely empirical, scientific explanation for that part of the human experience, it's very real to an awful lot of people, and very comforting to a lot of those. I see no harm in exploring it objectively and intelligently, other than that, it seems well neigh impossible for many people to keep their wits about them in said exploration. They end up proselytizing for their beliefs and/or agendas, or going off the deep end, or both. Is that reason enough to throw out the baby with the bathwater? I'm not ready to say that yet. Not that I'm holding my breath, either. I'm just open.

[Deva]

Oh absolutely. It's no small thing to say that how we imagine the world and interact internally with that imagination, creates a living reality of it in ourselves which then will and does affect the external world, creating it in an objective way. And that goes for the positive as well. In no small way is the term self-fulfilled prophecy based squarely in this.

 

This is why to me, in moving beyond anxieties and concerns, falling into the nature of being itself, our spiritual nature realized, it will affect the mental, emotional, and physical reality not just for ourselves but the entire world. We indeed are all interconnected, and how this begins inside of us, within us and flows out to the world is in fact that wellspring of life itself in action, from the unmanifest to the manifest world.

 

It is simply a fact of my life experience that mental training has had a profound effect. I think that the existence of this website is testimony to that fact. We were indoctrinated as children and it had a huge effect on how we look at life- negative mostly but that it has had an effect is my point. The big question to me for the last two decades or so, is - can another positive training take over and take the place of this negative training and turn it around? I have thought this is possible for at least the last ten years. It is a tremendous effort. I see some progress, but am not there yet completely. This is what I suppose I would say is my "spiritual life" and is more necessary to me than anything else in life beyond mere sustenance.

[Vigile]

I think spirituality is feel-good bunkum. We are our bodies; when they are gone, we are gone. What some perceive as their spirits are just neurons firing across synapses.

 

Them's fight'n words 'round here.

 

Unfortunately I agree with you, so cover me while I make a run for the feed trough.

[Vigile]

My take on it is that at least in this age, where there is at minimum a communal satellite TV available for most anyone to watch, there is no such thing as a rice farmer who is unaware that he or she is working ten times as hard for one twentieth the wage of zillions of other people in the world.

 

Perhaps you're right, but I recall a conversation I had with a taxi driver in India following a local terrorist attack while I was there. He asked "didn't you guys have some sort of terrorist attack a few years ago in Hollywood or something?" He was referring to 9/11.

[Vigile]

I think spirituality is feel-good bunkum. We are our bodies; when they are gone, we are gone. What some perceive as their spirits are just neurons firing across synapses.

As one Robert to another, I don't know that I disagree anymore as such with your statement, but whether or not there's ultimately a purely empirical, scientific explanation for that part of the human experience, it's very real to an awful lot of people, and very comforting to a lot of those. I see no harm in exploring it objectively and intelligently, other than that, it seems well neigh impossible for many people to keep their wits about them in said exploration. They end up proselytizing for their beliefs and/or agendas, or going off the deep end, or both. Is that reason enough to throw out the baby with the bathwater? I'm not ready to say that yet. Not that I'm holding my breath, either. I'm just open.

 

I agree with you too, but I wonder if we are not on the verge of creating a pill that will remove the need for intimate knowledge of things Zarathustra, et al imparted.

[DesertBob]

... I wonder if we are not on the verge of creating a pill that will remove the need for intimate knowledge of things Zarathustra, et al imparted.

I doubt it. I am ever suspicious of the silver bullet.

[DesertBob]

Perhaps you're right, but I recall a conversation I had with a taxi driver in India following a local terrorist attack while I was there. He asked "didn't you guys have some sort of terrorist attack a few years ago in Hollywood or something?" He was referring to 9/11.

Huh. Maybe I am not adequately factoring in the endless ability of people to pretend anything doesn't exist or isn't what it is. Still, I have to believe that keeping your eyes wide shut has to be getting increasingly difficult.

[asanerman]

... I wonder if we are not on the verge of creating a pill that will remove the need for intimate knowledge of things Zarathustra, et al imparted.

I doubt it. I am ever suspicious of the silver bullet.

 

These words sound unusually familiar! First came the prohibition not to meddle with the "intimate knowledge"--Pandora's box. Next came the remedies-- the opium--myth, magic, religion--all the isms, ignorance is bliss. Next modernity, postmodernity, Pluralism.

 

Now lets put the Genie back in the bottle--"remove the need to know."

 

All I've read through out this thread rings disturbingly clear in so many ways for me!

[lynx]

Moving on. I'd rather be a rice worker in India than a homeless person in DC. I've seen how both live and without a doubt, the rice workers have it better. If they are homeless, they build a shack on the side of the road using palm branches. They have cell phones, they have motorized scooters, they have their family with them, and they are not shunned by the rest of humanity.

I would much rather be the rice worker as well. This is precisely why I'm willing to go "live off the grid" as we were discussing in the other thread. If faced with poverty of that magnitude, I'd choose to do it closer to nature as opposed to the artificial environments that humans have created, with the noise and dangers of crime that come with that. That's an altogether different kind of 'harsh' that I'm not wired for. Being homeless in any city in the US would be much grimmer for me to face. I'd rather be wallowing in crap-infested rice field water and sleeping under palm branches than wandering the streets of any US city and sleeping in a cardboard box. It's no contest.

 

In Vietnam they make $3/day, and in India, they make $1/day. These numbers sound shocking to an American or other westerner, but that too is because we apply our own perspective to it. We could never survive on such a small amount, but in India, rice costs you $0.05 a day and you probably raise your own chickens and pigs for meat if you eat meat. Other costs are virtually nil, so they can in fact save their money and buy the cell phones and motor scooters I mentioned earlier. When I first met my wife, she was working for $50 a month in Russia. On that and a few extra dollars she was able to scrape up selling lost and found items from the train station she worked at, she was able to take vacations to Europe once a year, she bought a $600 fur coat, and lived a decent life.

Yes, it's relative to the cost of living of an area. Being someone who is accustomed to living a very minimalist lifestyle in comparison to the average US citizen, although this type of thing is much harder here, I'm no stranger to having a taste of it. Because of my lifestyle, I've been able to even save a little in situations where others would have been in debt.

 

I have to wonder though, which are the unlucky ones? The ones stuck in the rice fields not knowing more is out there, or the kids who got a taste of MTV and are now bumming around Hanoi? This is not a rhetorical question.

Well I suppose that would be entirely subjective, but you're making a very good point. Is ignorance bliss? Or is it just a matter of which types of environments we gravitate towards and feel more comfortable in as individuals? I'd take the rice field again.

 

 

Edit -- typos

[lynx]

That is a very good point, Vigile. I do understand the principle that you can't bemoan what you don't even know. That's just the hierarchy of needs. Also, even I would probably rationalize wallowing amidst the water buffalo dung if I had satisfying relationships to support thereby; they may not know the physical ease of the west but they may well not know its alienation, either.

I agree with that. The alienation of the west is a significant issue.

 

Still, a major social problem in Vietnam is the droves of young people looking for a better life in urban areas and ending up as bums or criminals because they don't have the education and skills to survive there. They are probably getting just enough of a glimpse of what is possible that they can no longer accept the destiny of a rice farmer. This drives home the point that while living a very limited, ignorant existence is one way to be philosophical about the challenges of life, it doesn't change the fact that they are objectively challenges.

One could even argue that just as I may lack perspective that allows a rice farmer to be content with his existence, he may lack perspective that would allow him to know what is possible and that he can better himself, and how to go about it.

Absolutely. Hardships are hardships, regardless of one's perspective. The thing that is different is how one perceives those challenges and what they're able to do about it.

 

At one point in an excursion a wisp of a woman poled all four of us plus our guide on a flatboat, one hour up and one hour down a river to and from our destination in 95 degree heat. Our guide explained that she had gotten up at 4 am and worked for 3 hours in the rice fields while the sun was low, then spent the day rowing us and waiting for us for the return trip, for whatever amount of money the tour company paid her; then, back to the rice fields at dusk and then collecting duck eggs -- and 3 days a week, somewhere in there, fitting in a visit to the market to sell said eggs. Rinse and repeat. Whether this was overstated to elicit my sympathy or not, I said, screw it, and gave her 200,000 dong as a tip -- about $10 US or over three days wages to her. She nearly cried with gratitude -- the guide told me later, she said not so much about the money as that she was not invisible to us and that she was appreciated.

The world needs more people like you, Bob.

 

Don't tell me that after she has this experience a few times she and her compatriots will figure out a few things: she should be getting paid more by the tour company; many of her customers are self-absorbed prigs; there is a whole world and existence out there that she is unaware of. Probably all I did for her was plant the seeds of realizing how hideous her life actually is.

Sadly, I'm sure this is very true, except for the last part. You planted a seed of kindness, she was not invisible to you, and you made her feel appreciated. That is not likely to make her see her life as more hideous, although it may make her more aware of how self-adsorbed others are in comparison, but I'll bet she'll never forget your gesture.

[Vigile]

Well I suppose that would be entirely subjective, but you're making a very good point. Is ignorance bliss? Or is it just a matter of which types of environments we gravitate towards and feel more comfortable in as individuals? I'd take the rice field again.

 

Yeah, you're right. My best friend still works in the grocery store where we met 25 years ago. I hated every single minute of every day there and longed for more, so I eventually got an education and moved on. He was never bothered like I was.

[Vigile]

Sadly, I'm sure this is very true, except for the last part. You planted a seed of kindness, she was not invisible to you, and you made her feel appreciated. That is not likely to make her see her life as more hideous, although it may make her more aware of how self-adsorbed others are in comparison, but I'll bet she'll never forget your gesture.

 

This reminds me of an old baba (Russian grandma) I gave some money to a few years back. I've been living in major cities for more than 10 years, so I'm pretty jaded about street beggars, largely because a lot of them are victims of a cruel mafia that takes a percentage of their take and fights over street corners. Anyway, there was this pitiful old baba selling old books outside the metro who was just different from your average beggar. I gave her roughly $5 and she looked up at me with glassy eyes and asked "why did you give me so much young man?"

[Antlerman]

I think spirituality is feel-good bunkum. We are our bodies; when they are gone, we are gone. What some perceive as their spirits are just neurons firing across synapses.

Can't keep your atheism in your pants? Feel a need to whip it out because you're insecure? It's positively amazing how exactly like fundamentalist Christianity this behavior is which is so irked by views other than their own religious beliefs they feel a need to put down other views, arrogantly asserting their own.

 

Aside from the fact this is a blatantly obvious display of insecurity to me, please read the rules of this forum before posting in here again:

 

This area is for those who have left Christianity for some other form of theism or spirituality.

 

All members (except apologists) are permitted to post in this area. However, all are asked to especially adhere to the foundational purpose of this site while visiting this section: namely, to encourage ex-Christians.

 

Although Ex-Christian.net has no particular quarrel with deists, pagans, Buddhists, and other forms of non-evangelical spiritual thinkers, at times discussions do have a tendency to create the impression that "ex-Christian" automatically means "atheist." The reality is, ex-Christian only means ex-Christian. Nothing else is implied by the term.

 

In this one area of Ex-Christian.net, each individual who has adopted an alternative spiritual expression should feel encouraged to freely express any experiences, thoughts, or opinions without fear of being brow beaten, harshly criticized, or condemned.

[Vigile]

I don't see any evidence of insecurity in his post. An angry response to it... Nevermind He broke the forum rules by posting his opinion in the wrong section, but seems to me, it's just that, his opinion. It's my opinion too, fwiw, but I'll try and keep it in my pants.

[Antlerman]

I don't see any evidence of insecurity in his post. An angry response to it... Nevermind He broke the forum rules by posting his opinion in the wrong section, but seems to me, it's just that, his opinion. It's my opinion too, fwiw, but I'll try and keep it in my pants.

Of course it's his opinion. Having different opinions is not the issue at all, and anytime people try to say its about that I hear that as a deflection from the real issue. All opinions are welcome. Branding other ExChristian's views that aren't atheism "bunkum" is, in a thread devoted to asking people what their new spirituality is now as former Christian is in fact an insult.

 

Personally I think modern, Neo-Atheism is just Christianity without God that hasn't gotten over itself yet. That's my opinion. But for me to go into a thread started legitimately asking Atheists what their views about Atheism is, and not to be contributing on topic, but instead just start asserting my opinions that atheism is just another religion by saying non-discussion words such as, "Your views are a bunch of delusional bunkum!", would blatantly be about me and my need to assert my own views by attacking theirs, and that would be driven by my own insecurities about others seeing the world differently than me.

 

Sadly, I see this again and again in here (not at all from you or Bob, to be clear). I say its sad, because I love discussion that is intelligent of all differing views, and the rationalist, scientific views are a wonderful part of the whole of our human experience. Sad when dialog can't ensue in order to further our broader, richer understanding of ourselves as people now freed from the chains of religious dogma. What I hear in a simple comment as his is nothing more than just trying to assert a new religious dogma. Freethought? Where is it? It's just an opinion? No, it's a behavior.

[Vigile]

Personally I think modern, Neo-Atheism is just Christianity without God that hasn't gotten over itself yet. That's my opinion.

 

I agree with that too.

 

Branding other ExChristian's views that aren't atheism "bunkum" is, in a thread devoted to asking people what their new spirituality is now as former Christian is in fact an insult,

 

Perhaps he didn't notice which forum he was replying in. I didn't until you raised the issue. Personally, I can't help the fact that I too think spirituality is just tapping into the brain's synapses as he stated. I've tried, but I honestly do not get why it's so meaningful to some. I try to be respectful nonetheless, but I also don't want to walk on egg shells afraid to hurt the feelings of others simply for agreeing with a statement that was agreeable to me.

 

Anyway, I agree people need a forum where they won't be challenged by those who disagree with them. Ro shouldn't have made that statement here and had I realized which forum I was in, I wouldn't have responded with my agreement to him either just out of respect for my belief there is that need for a protected area.

[Ro-bear]

I think spirituality is feel-good bunkum. We are our bodies; when they are gone, we are gone. What some perceive as their spirits are just neurons firing across synapses.

Can't keep your atheism in your pants? Feel a need to whip it out because you're insecure? It's positively amazing how exactly like fundamentalist Christianity this behavior is which is so irked by views other than their own religious beliefs they feel a need to put down other views, arrogantly asserting their own.

 

Aside from the fact this is a blatantly obvious display of insecurity to me, please read the rules of this forum before posting in here again:

 

This area is for those who have left Christianity for some other form of theism or spirituality.

 

All members (except apologists) are permitted to post in this area. However, all are asked to especially adhere to the foundational purpose of this site while visiting this section: namely, to encourage ex-Christians.

 

Although Ex-Christian.net has no particular quarrel with deists, pagans, Buddhists, and other forms of non-evangelical spiritual thinkers, at times discussions do have a tendency to create the impression that "ex-Christian" automatically means "atheist." The reality is, ex-Christian only means ex-Christian. Nothing else is implied by the term.

 

In this one area of Ex-Christian.net, each individual who has adopted an alternative spiritual expression should feel encouraged to freely express any experiences, thoughts, or opinions without fear of being brow beaten, harshly criticized, or condemned.

 

 

Wow. Sorry to have offended. Just expressing an opinion. I'll go now.

[Noggy]

I don't see any evidence of insecurity in his post. An angry response to it... Nevermind He broke the forum rules by posting his opinion in the wrong section, but seems to me, it's just that, his opinion. It's my opinion too, fwiw, but I'll try and keep it in my pants.

Of course it's his opinion. Having different opinions is not the issue at all, and anytime people try to say its about that I hear that as a deflection from the real issue. All opinions are welcome. Branding other ExChristian's views that aren't atheism "bunkum" is, in a thread devoted to asking people what their new spirituality is now as former Christian is in fact an insult.

 

Personally I think modern, Neo-Atheism is just Christianity without God that hasn't gotten over itself yet. That's my opinion. But for me to go into a thread started legitimately asking Atheists what their views about Atheism is, and not to be contributing on topic, but instead just start asserting my opinions that atheism is just another religion by saying non-discussion words such as, "Your views are a bunch of delusional bunkum!", would blatantly be about me and my need to assert my own views by attacking theirs, and that would be driven by my own insecurities about others seeing the world differently than me.

 

Sadly, I see this again and again in here (not at all from you or Bob, to be clear). I say its sad, because I love discussion that is intelligent of all differing views, and the rationalist, scientific views are a wonderful part of the whole of our human experience. Sad when dialog can't ensue in order to further our broader, richer understanding of ourselves as people now freed from the chains of religious dogma. What I hear in a simple comment as his is nothing more than just trying to assert a new religious dogma. Freethought? Where is it? It's just an opinion? No, it's a behavior.

 

 

Saying that you think Spirituality is bullshit is just as valid an opinion as saying it isn't.

I guess I just find it highly amusing that you shoot down his opinion by saying that he shouldn't shoot down peoples opinions.

 

 

[Deva]

Saying that you think Spirituality is bullshit is just as valid an opinion as saying it isn't.

 

Of course its an opinion, but bearing in mind the rules of this section of the forum, it should not be expressed here, valid or not. Go onto Rants and Replies or the Lion's Den or any number of other places and express this opinion that its bullshit. There it wouldn't be against the rules of the forum.

[Noggy]

Saying that you think Spirituality is bullshit is just as valid an opinion as saying it isn't.

 

Of course its an opinion, but bearing in mind the rules of this section of the forum, it should not be expressed here, valid or not. Go onto Rants and Replies or the Lion's Den or any number of other places and express this opinion that its bullshit. There it wouldn't be against the rules of the forum.

 

Perhaps when someone dwaddles into the spirituality forum saying that it doesn't seem that it is so, you should help them see the "spiritual light". He wasn't ranting, he was just saying it doesn't seem to be true. I'd say the burden of proof of spirituality would be on you, and I for one would be interested in hearing an explanation that goes beyond neurons.

[Deva]

Saying that you think Spirituality is bullshit is just as valid an opinion as saying it isn't.

 

Of course its an opinion, but bearing in mind the rules of this section of the forum, it should not be expressed here, valid or not. Go onto Rants and Replies or the Lion's Den or any number of other places and express this opinion that its bullshit. There it wouldn't be against the rules of the forum.

 

Perhaps when someone dwaddles into the spirituality forum saying that it doesn't seem that it is so, you should help them see the "spiritual light". He wasn't ranting, he was just saying it doesn't seem to be true. I'd say the burden of proof of spirituality would be on you, and I for one would be interested in hearing an explanation that goes beyond neurons.

 

You haven't been here very long. This particular section of the forum is the ONE place on this site that those of us that still find a spiritual life meaningful don't have to prove anything. It isn't our obligation to help an atheist see anything. If they want a reasoned discussion they can take it to the colliseum section.

 

I don't think he was ranting. He apologized as appropriate and its no longer a problem, unless you decide to make it one. If you do, I will leave it to the Moderators.