Belief In A God?

[Antlerman]

When you explore duality is it more like exploring anti-derivatives or more like exploring emitter arrays?

I assume you mean nonduality? No actually, and this has been what I've said in pretty much everything I've said in these posts, that it is not an intellectual, conceptual reality. It's not a belief or faith system. It in not anything that can be penetrated with reason, logic, or any other cognitive function. Nor quantified in some definition, some theory, some model, some doctrine, some theology, or some dogma.

 

The best analogy I can give at the moment is it is the difference between trying to understand everything you can about an ocean, how it was formed, the volume of water, the history of settlements on its beaches, and on and on, versus the experience of falling back into it and being immersed in it. One is cognitive, conceptual, external; the other engulfs your whole being. It is a lived experience. Call it a quality difference.

[blackpudd1n]

I see no evidence for any deity, singular or plural. I am an atheist on the balance of probabilities, which I see being overwhlemingly against there being a deity. However, even if there is a deity, they don't seem to care that I pay it/them no attention, so either way, I just get on with my life, do my thing, and don't worry about it.

Hey Pudd, you did it again! You voiced my thoughts better than I - thanks..

 

You're welcome, Raoul I know what you mean- Akheia often does the same thing to me lol.

[LivingLife]

What seems the pertinent point is that this is true, if you define them in the way you do. That's why I asked if you were able to see or hear or even sense any difference in how I am speaking about this? A "figment of man's imagination" hardly applies to the points I made, or what others here have been making as well. I know to what you're referring, and with that I agree. This does not relate to that. Unless you can show how it does?

Yes I do see the difference and I already touched on that. Internalising stuff and calling that god is redefining words that already have a universal meaning

I think how I hear this is that you were hearing it coming from a Western, Christian mindset. In which case, yes it would be just substituting different symbols, but in a context that is from a Christian point of view. The entire mindset is very different however. The meaning of the symbols is internalized in a very different way. The West externalizes all of these things, as outside ourselves, up there, in heaven, etc. The points I am saying and bringing up is that those are 'external expressions', of an internal reality. It is ultimately "in us", but that by no means translates into just a figment of imagination. A symbolic expression of the substance or essence of being is more accurate.

Whatever one internalises, still remains a figment of their imagination or more simply stated, it all happens in one's brain/head. There is nothing "out there" or "in there". The mystic folk do tend to want these internal experiences to be real and mean something bigger but they are all achieved by getting the brain to release endorphins or whatever that gives these feelings of well being or oneness with with nature, the world etc. Weed had this same effect on me back in my 20s until the munchies kicked in.

An interesting analogy. I kind of like it, but I would say in how I see it is that God is the rum, and religions are the different mixes. (Whereas the glass, the beverage, the person, the drink, the experience, the high, the stupor, the drunken sex, etc, would be the Godhead itself. ).

 

BTW, I don't view this as a debate, nor am I interested in that. I enjoy a healthy discussion from different points of view. Everyone gains in this.

No that is fine but my comments tend to be "in your face" as I feel no need to pull punches of be sensitive to what folk hold onto as true for them, That is the crux of the matter, what is true for you or some does not make it an empirical truth for all.

 

While some folk look for a deeper meaning to life, I find no need. There really is no profound meaning to life except to live it to the fullest as this is it.

 

The alternate exit strategies all seemed to me, at the time, folk's way of substituting something for the so called "god shaped vacuum" and what I term a replacement theology. All of my woo moments in xianity were profoundly real at the time but now I know it was all self induced and all of it manufactured by my brain as I willed it to be true/real. Maybe some folk get so hooked on these experiences that they need to find other ways to sustain them.

 

Atheism has turned out to be the simplest philosophical outlook on life.

[mymistake]

The alternate exit strategies all seemed to me, at the time, folk's way of substituting something for the so called "god shaped vacuum" and what I term a replacement theology. All of my woo moments in xianity were profoundly real at the time but now I know it was all self induced and all of it manufactured by my brain as I willed it to be true/real. Maybe some folk get so hooked on these experiences that they need to find other ways to sustain them.

 

Atheism has turned out to be the simplest philosophical outlook on life.

 

You bring up an interesting point. I had been in Christianity for a very long time. And Christianity had given me the idea that we all have a "God shaped hole" in our soul. It was just one of the many wonderful "gifts" they programmed into my brain in their effort to enslave me for life. I was an emotional wreck for a long time after I realized the Bible was false. But I noticed a major change around five months after becoming an atheist. I no longer felt like I had any kind of hole in my soul. That yearning for a God just doesn't exist anymore. It's just a faint memory. Atheism also cured me of my terrible fear of demons. I don't have to worry about invisible creatures watching me. I use to worry that angles were watching me when I used the toilet and that demons were reading my mind while I was sleeping. But it's all gone along with my "God shaped hole".

[blackpudd1n]

The alternate exit strategies all seemed to me, at the time, folk's way of substituting something for the so called "god shaped vacuum" and what I term a replacement theology. All of my woo moments in xianity were profoundly real at the time but now I know it was all self induced and all of it manufactured by my brain as I willed it to be true/real. Maybe some folk get so hooked on these experiences that they need to find other ways to sustain them.

 

Atheism has turned out to be the simplest philosophical outlook on life.

 

You bring up an interesting point. I had been in Christianity for a very long time. And Christianity had given me the idea that we all have a "God shaped hole" in our soul. It was just one of the many wonderful "gifts" they programmed into my brain in their effort to enslave me for life. I was an emotional wreck for a long time after I realized the Bible was false. But I noticed a major change around five months after becoming an atheist. I no longer felt like I had any kind of hole in my soul. That yearning for a God just doesn't exist anymore. It's just a faint memory. Atheism also cured me of my terrible fear of demons. I don't have to worry about invisible creatures watching me. I use to worry that angles were watching me when I used the toilet and that demons were reading my mind while I was sleeping. But it's all gone along with my "God shaped hole".

 

Yes, me too. I have found great peace in atheism- peace that I was told could only come from jebus. Funny that.

[Antlerman]

What seems the pertinent point is that this is true, if you define them in the way you do. That's why I asked if you were able to see or hear or even sense any difference in how I am speaking about this? A "figment of man's imagination" hardly applies to the points I made, or what others here have been making as well. I know to what you're referring, and with that I agree. This does not relate to that. Unless you can show how it does?

Yes I do see the difference and I already touched on that. Internalising stuff and calling that god is redefining words that already have a universal meaning

I still see the same dichotomy at play here, and I am becoming persuaded there is no way to overcome that by the simple use of language from my mind to yours or others. That's not meant as an offense, but I see it simply boils down to personal exposure. Everything you say, I get from that point of view. It makes sense from that point of view. It's logical and reasonable from the point of view. I know and have shared that point of view. What I am speaking about is not from within that framework of perception.

 

I think how I hear this is that you were hearing it coming from a Western, Christian mindset. In which case, yes it would be just substituting different symbols, but in a context that is from a Christian point of view. The entire mindset is very different however. The meaning of the symbols is internalized in a very different way. The West externalizes all of these things, as outside ourselves, up there, in heaven, etc. The points I am saying and bringing up is that those are 'external expressions', of an internal reality. It is ultimately "in us", but that by no means translates into just a figment of imagination. A symbolic expression of the substance or essence of being is more accurate.

Whatever one internalises, still remains a figment of their imagination or more simply stated, it all happens in one's brain/head. There is nothing "out there" or "in there".

When you say there is nothing out there or in there, I'd be curious what you mean? No subject/object duality? No mind, no psyche, no psychology, nothing but matter? I ask because overcoming a gross-reductionist model of reality in speaking the way I am is no likely to happen. When I speak of internal, I mean from behind these eyes, what goes on in the mind, the emotions, the subconscious, etc, as opposed to external which is objects which exist outside myself as "not me". Do you reject mind and all sciences such as psychology?

 

The mystic folk do tend to want these internal experiences to be real and mean something bigger

Negative. That sounds like a projection of your experiences in retrospect coming from that mindset I have been speaking about. Speaking as a mystic myself it is not about seeking meaning or wanting them to 'be real', whatever exactly that means. I know the are my own subconscious mind, there is no wanting them to be some supernatural god out there in order to give your life meaning through beliefs in hope, a greater, bigger, happier beyond.

 

I've said it before, and will for the benefit of those reading again, these are experiences that in fact are much bigger than our simple cognitive thought world we embed our sense of self within and call reality. They are in fact ourselves, not 'out there', but it is tapping into those parts of ourselves that are greater than just those busy thoughts, and allowing them to really come to surface and to the conscious, waking mind. As such it is much, much more information within us, with our brains if you prefer to attribute it to a biological organ, that is 'bigger than' just what we see and interpret through the processes of cognitive brain function. As a result, your entire perceptual reality shifts in understanding. It is more information. It is bigger than, greater than, and beyond just what we 'think'.

 

Do I believe that is supernatural? No. Do I believe the result adds to the value and quality of living ones life. Oh, hell yes! And I can tell you it has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with 'what we tell ourselves', seeking 'meaning', 'what we believe' or any and all of those. Nothing. And the reason why is because all of those are part of that brain that we create reality through in cognitive concepts. Those are just manipulating that same 'what we think' reality we embed our self-sense with in. It is instead a lived reality through an expanded awareness. Period. Not some belief. Life takes on deeper and higher and wider dimensions, and none of it comes through what you tell yourself, what you believe, what you hope for. I comes through opening yourself to it and swimming within it, without trying to codify, quantify, and tuck into your bag of ideas to pull out when you need a 'feel good' moment. It simply is beyond all of that It is categorically different.

 

All that any 'imagination' you use is within a practice that exposes you to these parts of yourself are vehicles of transportation. They are not wished for to be something bigger than ourselves. They are what we offer to ourselves in our path to connect to our higher self, that part of us always there, but not readily seen. Once you get to the destination, the vehicles are no longer needed. They have served the purpose and are no longer needed. You are that God.

 

Trust me, that is not the Charismatic experience you and I were exposed to, even though in its own way it comes from the same place. Again, they have no idea what that stick shift on the floor of the car is that they found and sit in and rev the motor up, thinking its all about the 'feel good' of the engine vibrating their bodies. You find that seeking the experience, will in fact lead you to miss the actual meat. The experience is simply a vehicle in response to that initial exposure, but the goal lays beyond experience and experience is inferior to what lays beyond it. It where you go in the vehicle that is the point, not the experience of the ride.

 

 

I'll stop here and only to add, that I agree with everyone who says atheism gives them peace. To reject all that fear and supersition surrounding some conceptual God who lords over your like a cosmic warlord is a freeing experience. It was through atheism that I had that freedom to lay everything on the table and sort out what needed to in order to go the next step for myself in my journey beyond Christianity.

[freeasabird]

The alternate exit strategies all seemed to me, at the time, folk's way of substituting something for the so called "god shaped vacuum" and what I term a replacement theology. All of my woo moments in xianity were profoundly real at the time but now I know it was all self induced and all of it manufactured by my brain as I willed it to be true/real. Maybe some folk get so hooked on these experiences that they need to find other ways to sustain them.

 

Atheism has turned out to be the simplest philosophical outlook on life.

 

You bring up an interesting point. I had been in Christianity for a very long time. And Christianity had given me the idea that we all have a "God shaped hole" in our soul. It was just one of the many wonderful "gifts" they programmed into my brain in their effort to enslave me for life. I was an emotional wreck for a long time after I realized the Bible was false. But I noticed a major change around five months after becoming an atheist. I no longer felt like I had any kind of hole in my soul. That yearning for a God just doesn't exist anymore. It's just a faint memory. Atheism also cured me of my terrible fear of demons. I don't have to worry about invisible creatures watching me. I use to worry that angles were watching me when I used the toilet and that demons were reading my mind while I was sleeping. But it's all gone along with my "God shaped hole".

 

If I may speculate on this for a moment, there may be a small morsel of truth. Many of us do have a yearning to understand where we came from. Some find an easy but false answer in religion. Those without or who leave religion seek this by exploring the true nature of our origins. It's what has made me so much more interested in science than I ever was before. And this is eroneously why some religious leaders would say science is my new religion. That is a very shortsided way of dealing with the true answer, which is but to explore and understand the way things really are.

[LivingLife]

I still see the same dichotomy at play here, and I am becoming persuaded there is no way to overcome that by the simple use of language from my mind to yours or others. That's not meant as an offense, but I see it simply boils down to personal exposure.

In a poll of whether there is a god or not the topic has veered off into mysticism which if I understand is your worldview. While I really have no objections to whatever it is you do, meditation or otherwise, what I see happening here is that whatever these experiences you are/have experienced you now want to equate that to be some type of godhead/god.

 

From a personal perspective, the mystics are still IMO into another kind of woo and why now the need to define that as god? You already have a name and a vocabulary to describe it, why complicate it and try and redefine it to equal xian woo? Is there an empirical need for your worldview to have a "god" in it?

 

When you say there is nothing out there or in there, I'd be curious what you mean? No subject/object duality? No mind, no psyche, no psychology, nothing but matter?

There is no sky daddy and there is no internalised god(s) to discover by meditation or other mind altering chemicals, (foreign or domestic)

 

The mystic folk do tend to want these internal experiences to be real and mean something bigger

Negative. That sounds like a projection of your experiences in retrospect coming from that mindset I have been speaking about. Speaking as a mystic myself it is not about seeking meaning or wanting them to 'be real', whatever exactly that means. I know they are my own subconscious mind, there is no wanting them to be some supernatural god out there in order to give your life meaning through beliefs in hope, a greater, bigger, happier beyond.

 

I've said it before, and will for the benefit of those reading again, these are experiences that in fact are much bigger than our simple cognitive thought world we embed our sense of self within and call reality. They are in fact ourselves, not 'out there', but it is tapping into those parts of ourselves that are greater than just those busy thoughts, and allowing them to really come to surface and to the conscious, waking mind. As such it is much, much more information within us, with our brains if you prefer to attribute it to a biological organ, that is 'bigger than' just what we see and interpret through the processes of cognitive brain function. As a result, your entire perceptual reality shifts in understanding. It is more information. It is bigger than, greater than, and beyond just what we 'think'.

How can there be more information if all information comes in through cognitive senses? My memory may fail me from time to time and yes there are exercises one can do to say get over my worst memory traits, forgetting a name of a stranger as soon as I am introduced (gets embarrassing to have to ask their names again). Even stuff like junior school times tables to learn multiplication and division etc. The brain is trained to spot patterns and reuse/apply them. Now obviously I am well trained in this respect as my wife often asks me a math question like she did yesterday, what is 45 divided by 2. I did not even have to process it cognitively and answered immediately 22.5. This is how my brain works naturally and I will add, my entire life I have had the ability to almost view stuff from a 3rd party perspective in interactions with real people, being able to divorce my observations from bias and/or personal opinion.

 

Now there are obviously other areas I am totally useless but see this as a limitation not a disability that needs to be breached/corrected.

 

All this should illustrate is that the mind can and is trained to achieve certain goals. Perhaps that area of my brain which allowed me to be sucked into the madness of theism and the subsequent delusion and much wasted time and wrong focussed effort, those walls are fortresses now. Does this make me a reductionist? Probably and that is how I approach all these non real issues.

 

Do I believe that is supernatural? No. Do I believe the result adds to the value and quality of living ones life. Oh, hell yes! And I can tell you it has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with 'what we tell ourselves', seeking 'meaning', 'what we believe' or any and all of those. Nothing. And the reason why is because all of those are part of that brain that we create reality through in cognitive concepts. Those are just manipulating that same 'what we think' reality we embed our self-sense with in. It is instead a lived reality through an expanded awareness. Period. Not some belief. Life takes on deeper and higher and wider dimensions, and none of it comes through what you tell yourself, what you believe, what you hope for. I comes through opening yourself to it and swimming within it, without trying to codify, quantify, and tuck into your bag of ideas to pull out when you need a 'feel good' moment. It simply is beyond all of that It is categorically different.

 

All that any 'imagination' you use is within a practice that exposes you to these parts of yourself are vehicles of transportation. They are not wished for to be something bigger than ourselves. They are what we offer to ourselves in our path to connect to our higher self, that part of us always there, but not readily seen. Once you get to the destination, the vehicles are no longer needed. They have served the purpose and are no longer needed. You are that God.

No I am merely me but I understand the concept of "ye are gods". I just find the need to find something outside of reality superfluous.

 

Trust me, that is not the Charismatic experience you and I were exposed to, even though in its own way it comes from the same place. Again, they have no idea what that stick shift on the floor of the car is that they found and sit in and rev the motor up, thinking its all about the 'feel good' of the engine vibrating their bodies. You find that seeking the experience, will in fact lead you to miss the actual meat. The experience is simply a vehicle in response to that initial exposure, but the goal lays beyond experience and experience is inferior to what lays beyond it. It where you go in the vehicle that is the point, not the experience of the ride.

How would you know what my experiences were? Leaving dumbfuckistan, this was the hardest part of the deconversion process as that was all too real esp. my initial conversion which did not happen in a church setting.

I'll stop here and only to add, that I agree with everyone who says atheism gives them peace. To reject all that fear and supersition surrounding some conceptual God who lords over your like a cosmic warlord is a freeing experience. It was through atheism that I had that freedom to lay everything on the table and sort out what needed to in order to go the next step for myself in my journey beyond Christianity.

The day I admitted I was atheist was very liberating and has only gotten better from there. I was pretty much my whole theist life a questioner and by some's standards would be classified as never a true xian™

 

Looking at the damage I "suffered" or moreso, my family when I went batshit crazy for teh lawd, I never want to open myself up to anything that will suck me into "la la land" or another theistic pond. Had I had my focus on my family and not the lawd and church, spent that time (and money) on vacations with the family, we would all have better memories to draw from and the time and money would have been better spent on something that was/is real.

 

My only regrets in life all have to do with my 8 years of intense delusion.

[asanerman]

The problem here is also like what is being discussed as spirituality.

 

 

I see your point LivingLife

 

I think we, again, are encountering issues of semantics--dealing with the relations between words (as symbols) and what they refer to and including theories of denotation, extension, naming, and truth.

 

In any discussion concerning the subjective i.e. the interior-individual (intentional) or self and consciousness or spirit, or mind or felt emotion,. issues of semantics inevitably cause our discussions to slide all over the place.

 

I'm of the opinion that an anti-individualist, anti self ideology is so deeply ingrained in our Western thinking, the notion of virtue so mired in associations with selflessness, that it is hard to resist the seductive glamor in notions of self-transcendence and emancipation from the ego that "transcend" logic.

 

The trans-personal movement, rebelling against 19th century materialism, has tended to adopt, as it's alternative to metaphysics, the notion that ultimate reality consists of "Consciousness" or "Mind."

 

"Consciousness" has no description, It is not worldviews, it is not values, it is not morals, not cognition, not value meme's, mathematico-logico structures, adaptive intelligences or multiple intelligences." "Consciousness" itself has no content--it is empty. "Inches" is a measure of wood, but nothing in itself.

"Consciousness itself is not a phenomenon, but the space in which phenomena arise." ~Ken Welber

 

The goal of our evolution, it could be stated, is to continue knocking down the ego-generated walls that produce the illusion of separateness from other things and beings in the universe until at last we arrive at a state and stage of consciousness devoid of the experience of separateness which is to "taste" to" be" "Suchness of Things," "Ultimate Ground." Nathaniel Brandon

 

As far as I'm concerned, the trans-personal perspective is not about going "beyond self-actualization" it's more about merely how we move to "higher" levels of self-actualization than are normally discussed in Western psychologies.

 

As consciousness continues to evolve in the direction of optimal functioning, letting go of inappropriate attachments and discovering previously unrecognized powers (human not supernatural), is it not the self that is evolving and thus actualizing these latent potentialities?

 

Given all that, lets say I am not fluent in expressing what Consciousness "is" or that the concepts of states and stages of awareness even exist and so I defer to what religion calls God, given religion's task is to inform me on what the cold, hard, flat facts science has been inept to convey.

 

Do you think I might be misunderstood?

 

Most of what I hear coming out of the humanists movement is more about angst than about advancing optimal human potential.

 

It gets weary when the baby and the bathwater are thrown out and one is still confronted with "how do I become all that is within me." How do I deal with the biochemical reactions that my body is putting me through and doing to me?

 

Now that there are only bodies, and organs and energy what am I to do until science uncovers a magic pill?

 

Am I making any sense?

 

I've had all I can stand of naive love and understanding! What I need is instruction.

 

I know that the instruction I have received in the past has been more than a little out dated, but I'm past that and am looking for the best that human knowledge has to offer concerning the spirited life.

 

I know down deep within me that there is more to this "spirit" thing than myth busting, Gods, or Holy Ghosts and Woo!

[mymistake]

The dao cannot be explained.

 

The dao can only be experienced.

[asanerman]

The dao cannot be explained.

 

The dao can only be experienced.

 

There you go!

 

How do you experience "Tao Te Ching" in Western terminology?

 

What states and stages are there along the way to the unspeakable Tao?

 

Oops! you can't speak it, for so as you do, its not That!

Just so were on topic, is Tao another word for the Western concept of God?

 

Just asking!

[asanerman]

The dao cannot be explained.

 

The dao can only be experienced.

 

There you go!

 

How do you experience "Tao Te Ching" in Western terminology?

 

What states and stages are there along the way to the unspeakable Tao?

 

Oops! you can't speak it, for so as you do, its not That!

Just so were on topic, is Tao another word for the Western concept of God?

 

Just asking!

 

How much knowledge does one have to cram it know Tao?

 

How many books does one have to read to find Spirit?

 

When will It's Suchness be felt?

 

These questions are rhetorical!

[LivingLife]

I enjoyed reading this post

I see your point LivingLife

 

I think we, again, are encountering issues of semantics--dealing with the relations between words (as symbols) and what they refer to and including theories of denotation, extension, naming, and truth.

 

In any discussion concerning the subjective i.e. the interior-individual (intentional) or self and consciousness or spirit, or mind or felt emotion,. issues of semantics inevitably cause our discussions to slide all over the place.

 

I'm of the opinion that an anti-individualist, anti self ideology is so deeply ingrained in our Western thinking, the notion of virtue so mired in associations with selflessness, that it is hard to resist the seductive glamor in notions of self-transcendence and emancipation from the ego that "transcend" logic.

This on the surface makes a hell of a lot of sense yet my experience is that the inverse is true. People are very much self centred and the religions while appealing to a side of folk that they believe will make them better people, what we see is that they remain essentially self centred, their part of the package deal is their believed salvation from an imaginary force/god/whatever.

 

The trans-personal movement, rebelling against 19th century materialism, has tended to adopt, as it's alternative to metaphysics, the notion that ultimate reality consists of "Consciousness" or "Mind."

 

"Consciousness" has no description, It is not worldviews, it is not values, it is not morals, not cognition, not value meme's, mathematico-logico structures, adaptive intelligences or multiple intelligences." "Consciousness" itself has no content--it is empty. "Inches" is a measure of wood, but nothing in itself.

"Consciousness itself is not a phenomenon, but the space in which phenomena arise." ~Ken Welber

This is all great and I can come to the same conclusion cognitively. The concept of golden rule putting others first, on the surface, makes sense. Yet after all this enlightenment folk are still in reality self centred; only a few stand out to be counted as "saints"

 

The goal of our evolution, it could be stated, is to continue knocking down the ego-generated walls that produce the illusion of separateness from other things and beings in the universe until at last we arrive at a state and stage of consciousness devoid of the experience of separateness which is to "taste" to" be" "Suchness of Things," "Ultimate Ground." Nathaniel Brandon

I like this and from an atheistic perspective, I think most folk do accept we are part and parcel of the whole, no more than star dust in water bags if you will. That is pretty much a reductionist POV

 

As far as I'm concerned, the trans-personal perspective is not about going "beyond self-actualization" it's more about merely how we move to "higher" levels of self-actualization than are normally discussed in Western psychologies.

 

As consciousness continues to evolve in the direction of optimal functioning, letting go of inappropriate attachments and discovering previously unrecognized powers (human not supernatural), is it not the self that is evolving and thus actualizing these latent potentialities?

I like that too

Given all that, lets say I am not fluent in expressing what Consciousness "is" or that the concepts of states and stages of awareness even exist and so I defer to what religion calls God, given religion's task is to inform me on what the cold, hard, flat facts science has been inept to convey.

 

Do you think I might be misunderstood?

 

Most of what I hear coming out of the humanists movement is more about angst than about advancing optimal human potential.

This is an ideal that will probably never be achieved. It requires adherence to another group think paradigm and folk are still to individualistic for this to work IMO.

It gets weary when the baby and the bathwater are thrown out and one is still confronted with "how do I become all that is within me." How do I deal with the biochemical reactions that my body is putting me through and doing to me?

 

Now that there are only bodies, and organs and energy what am I to do until science uncovers a magic pill?

 

Am I making any sense?

Yes

I've had all I can stand of naive love and understanding! What I need is instruction.

 

I know that the instruction I have received in the past has been more than a little out dated, but I'm past that and am looking for the best that human knowledge has to offer concerning the spirited life.

 

I know down deep within me that there is more to this "spirit" thing than myth busting, Gods, or Holy Ghosts and Woo!

Is this aspect of "spirited life" not something you were conditioned to believe exists?

 

Ergo, with that as a bias, searching for it you would most likely find it or find something that works for you? That said, if you do, great but it may not work for everyone. There probably is no philosophical model anywhere where a "one size fits all" exists. The best we do is go back to simplistic tribal affiliations and find "security" in smaller groups like churches or even like this forum where we share a common bond but remain to a large extent vastly diverse (which is natural).

 

Like I said earlier, the "atheist philosophical model" (if you can call it a philosophy) is still the simplest one around.

 

One of the new fads called theistic evolution illustrates (to me anyway) just how desperate folk are to hold onto the old while embracing the new. Of itself, the piggy back of godunnit to proven science (with some gaps) adds ZERO value to the exploration or the science itself, it is just woo packaged to make it sound sciencey and adherents are mostly not literate in basic science anyway.

 

I am pretty much a black and white guy yet still can marvel at the beauty of a rainbow or sunset or sunrise, obviously knowing exactly what optical mechanisms are at work. I am however not going to start chasing rainbows but will enjoy them when they appear.

[Ravenstar]

It begs for a definition. 'god' what does that mean? From what i have read in this thread alone, it's pretty open to interpretation.

 

I am open to the mysterious, the things that don't yet have answers, I am open to the questions too. I have had experiences that are, as yet, unexplainable. I no longer have a need to fill those gaps with 'god'... and science seems to answer a lot and more every day, about the wonder that is our universe, experience, perception, existence.

 

Artistically, i have this vision of the big bang (expansion, whatever) and that consciousness was begun at that moment and the evolution of the universe is just the expression of that...

 

I suspect that we will find out marvelous things with the exploration of quantum physics...and consciousness. I don't think we yet know just how connected everything really is. We may discover that the holographic universe is the reality. (which hurts my brain lol)

 

So, I think the key is in consciousness... can't support that scientifically, but that's my gut feeling on it.

 

I really like astronomy. When i finally sort of grasped how immense and incredible our universe is... that was the moment I realized that the concept of 'god' had to be at least as big as that.

 

So.. no, I do not believe in an anthropomorphic god/goddess. That's just silly. However, I am always open to new information.

[Antlerman]

Asanerman, Thank You!! I love how you are able to express this they way you have. Living Life, what he said! This is what I'm speaking of. There are some points I'd like to address what you brought up in response to him that bear good discussing points, but I'm happy that at least how he put it has helped to overcome the difficulties in my language usage to communicate this. More later. This makes me happy there's a step forward in understanding here.

[asanerman]

....There probably is no philosophical model anywhere where a "one size fits all" exists. The best we do is go back to simplistic tribal affiliations and find "security" in smaller groups like churches or even like this forum where we share a common bond but remain to a large extent vastly diverse (which is natural).

 

Like I said earlier, the "atheist philosophical model" (if you can call it a philosophy) is still the simplest one around.

 

I suppose then "atheist philosophical model" (if you can call it a philosophy) will take one back to the simplistic tribal affiliations and find "security" in smaller groups like churches or even like this forum where we share a common bond but remain to a large extent vastly diverse (which is natural).

 

One of the new fads called theistic evolution illustrates (to me anyway) just how desperate folk are to hold onto the old while embracing the new. Of itself, the piggy back of godunnit to proven science (with some gaps) adds ZERO value to the exploration or the science itself, it is just woo packaged to make it sound sciencey and adherents are mostly not literate in basic science anyway.

 

Without my going into a lot of details all say is this.

 

The internal war in the world of the sciences has always been between the atomists and the systems approaches. In the world of the humanities the great and pivotal war of the last century was between the modern Subjedtivists. (interior phenomenology, structuralism, hermeneutics, ethnomenthodology) and the prost-modern Intersubjectivists (autopoisesis i.e. congnitive science, empeircism i.e neurophysiology, social atopoiesis, systems theory), Science which basically about the "it" and "Its"--the exteriors from the smallest partial of "it" to planetary "its."

 

In other words, science per say isn't interested! When did Western psychology declare itself a science? On the morning of October 22, 1850 with Flecher's law? How young is new age? 19th century or later. How young are the Eastern psychologies? Of what t is the "science" of psychology concerned--interiors, the subjective?

 

My point is this, it was not science (the study of "it" and "its") or scientific materialism that crippled meditation, contemplation and spiritual studies in the humanities,it was the important truths of the postmodern Intersubjectiviest. What you or I subjectively "feel" about anything, be it marvel, wonder, beauty, or awe has never been the issue.

 

The war was and is within the humanities. And the spiritual writers and virtually all of the new paradigm writers completely misdiagnosed the situation with disastrous consequence. ~Wilber

 

The spiritualist think that if mysticism a has modern scientific support then a 'spiritual.worldview" (what ever that is) will be accepted not by the sciences but by the humanities . The enemy isn't science, which needs only the objective fact, it's the Intesubjectivist who have the beef with the subjectivists--those "scientist" of the internal self.

 

Don't forget that the whole point of Fechner's psychophysics was that sririt (being alive) and matter were inseparable, Two sides of one great reality. Fechner's attempts to measure aspects of the mind were meant to point out inseparability not to deny spirit altogether.

 

The consiciousness/mind/body problem appears insuperable.

 

It seems to me that posting an underlying reality of which both matter and mind (brain chemistry in all its electrochemical array) are manifestations would offer us a way out of the dilemma that has troubled philosophies of all colors, brands, or flavors and of all ages. I'm OK with the bear bones and whatever the conjecture we bring to the discussion about spirit. Hell who knows I might learn something and also teach something in the exchange.

 

Science is deaf to all things subjective and it should be. That notion does not prevent my marveling

at the beauty of a rainbow or sunset or sunrise, obviously knowing exactly what optical mechanisms are at work.

 

Nor does it prevent my wondering why it needs to be that way. I know I shouldn't but it comes the the teritorry of being.

 

Is this aspect of "spirited life" not something you were conditioned to believe exists?

 

Sure it is. What's wrong with realizing that and deciding for myself if what I think and feel things to be fits? The difficult trick is "combing" developments for information that would make my determinations illogical, detrimental, unhealthy? That is what myth busting is about, IMHO.

 

I think it was Jay Haley, (systems, and communications theorist/psychotherapist) that said communication is about power and control!

 

All of us are conditioned consciously and unconsciously (awareness), maturity is understanding how and is the conditioning promotes health.

 

My physician reminds me on a regular basis what conditioning involves for muscular and mental heath, of course he thinks he's an MD. What the hell does he know about body and mind, she's Hindu.

 

This is an ideal that will probably never be achieved. It requires adherence to another group think paradigm and folk are still to individualistic for this to work IMO.

 

 

 

I would be so sure, LovingLife. it looks as though you've broken "adherence to another group think paradigm" and the "belief in belief" ~Daniel Dennett

 

There's got to be a chance for a poor confused baster such as I to "break the spell" of dillusion!

 

Don't ya think?

[Geezer]

As a Deist I believe it may be possible that there is more to our existence than we have so far identified. The word God tends to project images of an anthropomorphic life form and that doesn’t resonate with me. I prefer the word sacred rather than God. I can envision the sacred as being something more like an energy force that has been woven into the fabric of the universe, or something that has been programmed into our DNA that influences us to be altruistic and empathetic. This “whatever” is something that contributes to the existence of life. But it doesn’t require worship, funding, prayers, etc. and it doesn’t intervene directly in the lives of humans.

 

Switching to a scientific perspective quantum physics has suggested there may be multiple universes and multiple dimensions. If those theories prove to be true that opens a whole new realm of possibilities including, I suppose, the possibility of anthropomorphic life forms that exist in these theoretical realities.

[asanerman]

As a Deist I believe it may be possible that there is more to our existence than we have so far identified. The word God tends to project images of an anthropomorphic life form and that doesn’t resonate with me. I prefer the word sacred rather than God. I can envision the sacred as being something more like an energy force that has been woven into the fabric of the universe, or something that has been programmed into our DNA that influences us to be altruistic and empathetic. This “whatever” is something that contributes to the existence of life. But it doesn’t require worship, funding, prayers, etc. and it doesn’t intervene directly in the lives of humans.

 

Switching to a scientific perspective quantum physics has suggested there may be multiple universes and multiple dimensions. If those theories prove to be true that opens a whole new realm of possibilities including, I suppose, the possibility of anthropomorphic life forms that exist in these theoretical realities.

 

I can live with that!

 

Thanks Geezer

[lunaticheathen]

I love it, I am seriously the only for really reals polytheist in this thread (in that I believe in literal, individual deities).

 

I IS SOOPER SPESHUL.

[asanerman]

I love it, I am seriously the only for really reals polytheist in this thread (in that I believe in literal, individual deities).

 

I IS SOOPER SPESHUL.

 

lunaticheathen you're poly special!

[Denyoz]

I'm not cultured much, so I like to keep things simple.

 

I voted "yes, gods plural". (So luna, you are not alone.) But I hesitated, because I also believe in a One God, above all others, who created everything that exists. I call him "The All" and he's so great that it's impossible for us humans to understand "His Allness" with our small brains.

 

To me, it all comes down to this: Do we have a soul (spiritual self) or are we just made up of random atoms that stick together? Personally, when I stopped believing that I had a soul, I became extremely depressed. Now this has changed.

 

I will never be a Christian again, but to me, spirituality is real. I need to make sense of my life, and without spirituality, nothing makes any sense. But I also need a spirituality that makes sense, and it has to be simple.

 

I am convinced now that I have a spiritual self because when I read spiritual material, I feel like I am being fed, my spirit feels satisfied, just like my body feels satisfied when I eat food. The challenge is to find good spiritual food for your spirit. You might have to taste a lot of different "foods" before you find what really satisfies and uplifts your soul.

 

I don't think you can find good spiritual food in any of the mainstream religions, just like you can't find good information by listening to mainstream media. The good stuff is hidden, but it's out there (on the Internet) and in there (in your spirit). Connect to both these sources and a "connection" will happen, by the power, the wisdom, and the love of The All, which is impossible for us to fully comprehend.

 

[TrueFreedom]

Typo. All == El

 

[TheBluegrassSkeptic]

I chose "No" on your poll.

 

For me, a deity means an entity/being/presence/supernatural force that purposefully/inadvertently created life and does/does not give a shit now. So to me, deities are a mythological simply because the whole concept leaves way too much wiggle room to fit as a natural presence.

 

Some have argued to me that this would include the Universe in itself, but for me, the Universe is natural, filled with what we consider supernatural elements because we don't understand everything yet.

 

In a nutshell, anything that comes in to my life claiming or behaving like some kind of woo inspired or instinctually sensed super being, I won't think deity. I'm going to think alien. Whether from space, or a different dimension, or what have you. I have seen so much of our science fiction come to life, I can't begin to just leave the reality that there could be many beings we do not know of yet or are aware of being around us. Awareness is key here. There are many entities we are not aware of except by microscopic pictures or the occasional news program. Seriously, how could there NOT be beings that can manipulate the environments around us that we perceive as being unable to manipulate? I cannot grasp the awe, wonder, and mysticism given the mythology of idols.

 

But that's just my two cents.

[atkegar]

This is a good question. I answered "unsure" for I am not sure. I know I do not believe in any god "out there", but am not sure as "Ground of Being", or even "Being" itself. I do know that if there is a "God", it does not give a shit about us. I lean toward no, though.

[Lilith666]

Evolution doesn't make sense to me; I don't understand how this amazingly complex universe could have developed from nothing, with no help. But I don't believe, as nice as the idea is, that there could be an all-powerful, omniscient deity who cares about us. So I'm a deist: God created the world, but unexplainably abandoned us.