Moving Towards Less Rigid Thinking

[Overcame Faith]

Due to the pressures of my work over the last several months, I have posted very little on ExC. Those pressures have lifted somewhat (thankfully!!), and I wanted to post something that has been on my mind for some time now.

 

What I want to share is how I, as an exChristian, have begun the difficult task of reconciling my departure from Christianity with matters that I will call spiritual. When I say “spiritual”, I do not necessarily refer to a deity, but instead to the concept that our lives may be something more than our mere physical existence. I will say upfront, though, that I do not know what that something is so I can give no better definition of "spirituality" than I offered in my previous sentence.

 

When I first deconverted, I was aghast that I had fallen so deeply for the Christian mythos. Upon my deconversion, my eyes were opened like never before and to the point that I saw that religion for what it was: A human system used to control its religious adherents. I was able to read the Bible without the blinders of faith and saw that it bore every mark of human, not divine, authorship and concepts. I was literally ashamed that I had fallen so deeply into its trap and I swore to myself that that would never happen to me again.

 

My way of protecting myself from ever again falling for a human religious system like Christianity, was to reject all forms of spirituality (as vaguely defined above) and to insist that I would never again believe anything without logic and scientific support. I needed that rigidity of thought for some time until I was more secure both emotionally and rationally with leaving Christianity behind.

 

As I became more secure in leaving Christianity, though, I began to think about the nature of being. I thought of such things as what is consciousness, is there a purpose to life, and, more broadly, whether there is some kind of purpose for the existence of the universe as a whole. I hope you do not think that I have written this to offer an explanation for consciousness or to give some profound insight into our purpose. Rather, I had another realization that, at least to me, was profound in its own way.

 

My realization was simply that I do not know what consciousness is nor do I know whether there is some purpose for my life or for the universe as a whole. It is that realization that has helped me to get past my early exChristian rigidity and to accept that another person’s view on such matters is not necessarily wrong simply because I may not agree with it. After all, if I freely admit that I do not know about these matters, then I am hardly in a position to say that someone else is wrong.

 

Though I am and shall always remain an exChristian, being fully convinced that Christianity is a false religion, I do not want to fall back into the trap that I was in as a Christian. That trap was to refuse even to consider other perspectives. I shall not allow logic and science to become my new “Bible” for things for which those disciplines fall short (at least as of this time).

 

I shall always be open to logic and science and will employ them as a first test. They are great tools and have helped to propel us into space, more efficient food production, medicine that has reduced human pain and suffering and lengthened our lives and countless other grand achievements. But I shall not stop thinking about “spirituality” as something that may have some validity if for nothing else than what the concept (thinking of it broadly) may offer as a perspective on this wondrous state of “being”.

 

I want to make something clear, though I referred to it in a previous paragraph. I do not say there is a deity of any type. Rather, I say that I do not know whether there may be some type of deity (though I am convinced that the Christian God does not exist) and thus am open to at least consider the concept. However, even if there is a deity, if that deity deems it important for us to know of its existence, then the burden of proof is on the deity since only it knows for sure of its own existence and, therefore, is in the only position to provide convincing evidence of its existence.

 

I am trying to convince no one of anything in this post. Rather, I offer my thoughts for what, if anything, they may be worth to you.

[Ouroboros]

It's the best post of the year. +big number.

[Positivist]

Thanks for sharing this with us, OF! I'm not quite there yet myself. I am so afraid of being sucked into another devastating black hole that I'm joyfully living 100% in the natural world. I'm just too damn scared to consider any sort of woo (no offense intended by the term). I'm so afraid that if I dial down my need for 'evidence', that I'll let anything go and become, oh I don't know, a Mormon or something.

 

I don't know what it means to be 'spiritual' except that maybe it means to live passionately and purposefully, carried along by the river of life, as we reach out to experience the world and others. Am I being 'spiritual' when I get into the groove at a neo-hippie neighbor's drum circle, or when I rescue a snake from off the road? Is spirituality the feeling/the buzz, or the acting with integrity?

 

I am completely guilty of rigid thinking. That's probably why I lost my faith in the first place. One's beliefs must have a degree of plasticity to them or they self-destruct under pressure/scrutiny. How does one become less rigid, though, and is it worth the risk? These are questions I am still asking.

 

Thanks for lots to chew on!!!!

[Ouroboros]

Thanks for sharing this with us, OF! I'm not quite there yet myself. I am so afraid of being sucked into another devastating black hole that I'm joyfully living 100% in the natural world. I'm just too damn scared to consider any sort of woo (no offense intended by the term).

Woot! Woot!

 

I'm so afraid that if I dial down my need for 'evidence', that I'll let anything go and become, oh I don't know, a Mormon or something.

What's the evidence for you liking a piece of music? What's the evidence for you feeling happy when you look at a sunset? Even when you reduce emotions to science, chemicals, enumerations, and what-nots, the numbers don't really say what you feel, it only defines how your body process it. Nothing wrong with science and measure, but a number attached to a book explaining how your brain processes a feeling of reading a poem doesn't improve or alter the feeling you're having.

 

I don't know what it means to be 'spiritual' except that maybe it means to live passionately and purposefully, carried along by the river of life, as we reach out to experience the world and others. Am I being 'spiritual' when I get into the groove at a neo-hippie neighbor's drum circle, or when I rescue a snake from off the road? Is spirituality the feeling/the buzz, or the acting with integrity?

I think it is. Can you put a scientific number or measurement to "you rescuing a snake of the road?"

 

I am completely guilty of rigid thinking. That's probably why I lost my faith in the first place. One's beliefs must have a degree of plasticity to them or they self-destruct under pressure/scrutiny. How does one become less rigid, though, and is it worth the risk? These are questions I am still asking.

Realizing that you experiencing and living life is more than just numbers reduced by a scientific formula. Nothing wrong with the numbers or the formulas, but you're the emergent effect from the properties of the natural things, not just properties.

 

Thanks for lots to chew on!!!!

Think about how the heck a consciousness can only be a number of atoms. It must be more than just a specific mix of atoms, it requires a process, energy, fields, space, time, history, ...

[midniterider]

Thanks for sharing this with us, OF! I'm not quite there yet myself. I am so afraid of being sucked into another devastating black hole that I'm joyfully living 100% in the natural world. I'm just too damn scared to consider any sort of woo (no offense intended by the term). I'm so afraid that if I dial down my need for 'evidence', that I'll let anything go and become, oh I don't know, a Mormon or something.

 

I don't know what it means to be 'spiritual' except that maybe it means to live passionately and purposefully, carried along by the river of life, as we reach out to experience the world and others. Am I being 'spiritual' when I get into the groove at a neo-hippie neighbor's drum circle, or when I rescue a snake from off the road? Is spirituality the feeling/the buzz, or the acting with integrity?

 

I am completely guilty of rigid thinking. That's probably why I lost my faith in the first place. One's beliefs must have a degree of plasticity to them or they self-destruct under pressure/scrutiny. How does one become less rigid, though, and is it worth the risk? These are questions I am still asking.

 

Thanks for lots to chew on!!!!

 

I think spirituality is whatever you deem it to be as long as you are in charge of it. I don't play well with groups so I make it up as I go along and dont take my spirituality too seriously. :-)

[pratt]

whatever is good, noble, beautiful and for the betterment of self and others, dwell and act on these things,,,,

 

i think that basically sums up my spirituality,,,,,,

[Vigile]

That's cool as long as the implication is not that those of us who are not spiritual are rigid in their thinking or somehow less enlightened.

 

I had spirituality pushed on me from birth and when I deconverted, I didn't seek other forms of spirituality as what I saw was built on the exact same arguments that christianity was built on by others for me. I'm an atheist not by choice but because that's where the evidence led me. I personally don't find arguments for spirituality compelling. I honestly think no ill of those who do. I hope the same is reciprocated.

[LivingLife]

What Vigile said and also like that is deities exist, the onus is on them to prove their existence.

 

Spirituality is as broad a concepts as religion is and means anything to anybody. The former word probably is more honest as it cannot define a single concept whereas religion is pretty much understood to various forms of theism and creator gods.

 

Do I personally need it? Hell no. My logic and rationalism helps me along the way just fine. If there were any real evidence, I could change my perspective. As I only discuss these matters online and occasionally with my wife and son, it is NOT a big issue in meatspace. I would say I and my son are atheist and and my wife and daughter agnostic leaning to theism but probably more deists. The only time I would ever get into debates would be if one of my kids went batshit crazy like I did.

[Overcame Faith]

Thanks for sharing this with us, OF! I'm not quite there yet myself. I am so afraid of being sucked into another devastating black hole that I'm joyfully living 100% in the natural world. I'm just too damn scared to consider any sort of woo (no offense intended by the term). I'm so afraid that if I dial down my need for 'evidence', that I'll let anything go and become, oh I don't know, a Mormon or something.

 

I know exactly what you mean about being afraid of being led into some other form of religious thinking. That is what I actively protected myself from. I had already seen that I have the potential for accepting religious thinking without subjecting it to proper scrutiny and, as I said, I swore that will never happen to me again. I am still committed to using proper scrutiny and have NOT abandoned rationality. Rather, I still embrace it. The only true difference in my thinking is that I will consider other things and will and do allow myself to think about meaning and purpose.

 

 

I don't know what it means to be 'spiritual' except that maybe it means to live passionately and purposefully, carried along by the river of life, as we reach out to experience the world and others. Am I being 'spiritual' when I get into the groove at a neo-hippie neighbor's drum circle, or when I rescue a snake from off the road? Is spirituality the feeling/the buzz, or the acting with integrity?

 

I do not know what it means to be "spiritual" either which is why my definition is so broad. To me it is an internal inquiry about whether there is more to this life just our material existence. I find the topic fascinating and, at least from my current perspective, I do not know whether there is any one right answer. So I am trying to be open about it and allow myself the latitude of considering a number of possibilities.

 

I am completely guilty of rigid thinking. That's probably why I lost my faith in the first place. One's beliefs must have a degree of plasticity to them or they self-destruct under pressure/scrutiny. How does one become less rigid, though, and is it worth the risk? These are questions I am still asking.

 

Thanks for lots to chew on!!!!

 

I do not think you are "guilty" of anything. That word implies wrongdoing and I do not see it as such. Rather, at least for me, my rigid thinking was part of an evolution of my post-Christianity mindset. It was necessary for a time.

[Overcame Faith]

whatever is good, noble, beautiful and for the betterment of self and others, dwell and act on these things,,,,

 

i think that basically sums up my spirituality,,,,,,

 

I like that. Thanks.

[Overcame Faith]

That's cool as long as the implication is not that those of us who are not spiritual are rigid in their thinking or somehow less enlightened.

 

I had spirituality pushed on me from birth and when I deconverted, I didn't seek other forms of spirituality as what I saw was built on the exact same arguments that christianity was built on by others for me. I'm an atheist not by choice but because that's where the evidence led me. I personally don't find arguments for spirituality compelling. I honestly think no ill of those who do. I hope the same is reciprocated.

 

There are no hidden implications to what I wrote. I was speaking only of myself and meant it in no judgmental fashion whatsoever. Who am I to say that because someone thinks differently than me that they are less enlightened?

[Ouroboros]

That's cool as long as the implication is not that those of us who are not spiritual are rigid in their thinking or somehow less enlightened.

I think it's more like developing a taste for different flavors of beer. It's not wrong to only like pale ales or lagers, but it's not bad to have the taste for IPAs, bitters, sours, darks, stouts, etc, either. Some people like tarts, some don't. Some like sweet, some don't. Whatever fits your taste is best for you. Simple as that.

 

I honestly think no ill of those who do. I hope the same is reciprocated.

In my case, absolutely.

 

The thing is though, to explain, I'm still an atheist. I have changed my view on what the definition of "spirituality" is. I think "spirituality" more of uplifting experiences in life. Those things that pick me up and make me feel life is special. It's a feeling, but it's a more exciting feeling that the everyday one. Being spiritual is just a matter of recognizing that those feelings and experiences exist and might be worth to try to find occasionally. I'm sure that Antlerman will correct me in this and tell me there's even more, but this is the place I'm in right now, and wherever you are or I am, that's where were supposed to be individually right now. We all have our own paths to walk.

[Ouroboros]

There are no hidden implications to what I wrote. I was speaking only of myself and meant it in no judgmental fashion whatsoever. Who am I to say that because someone thinks differently than me that they are less enlightened?

You're just a guy who realized you like brett beers and wanted to share your experience with others. (It's an parable/analogy, of course, I don't know if you like brett beer) And there are some others who have the same experience. No harm in sharing.

[Ouroboros]

It was necessary for a time.

Agree.

 

And not everyone walks the same path. A certain position or place on the path is not better or worse than another in the overall perspective. We all are where it's best for each one of us right now. But where I am right now is better than where I was before. It just doesn't mean it's better for someone else to be where I am because it's good for me.

[new2me]

What's the evidence for you liking a piece of music? What's the evidence for you feeling happy when you look at a sunset? Even when you reduce emotions to science, chemicals, enumerations, and what-nots, the numbers don't really say what you feel, it only defines how your body process it. Nothing wrong with science and measure, but a number attached to a book explaining how your brain processes a feeling of reading a poem doesn't improve or alter the feeling you're having.

 

I like this analogy to describe that the way we feel about things can't always be explained by evidence. But I guess I don't consider liking music, enjoying a sunset or other experiences that make me feel happy to be 'spiritual' experiences. I just like them. Perhaps it just boils down to the way you define 'spiritual'. I don't know. I've never been much into philosophy.

 

Edit: I am trying to get a better understanding of 'spirituality' just to bump up against what I recognize is 'rigid' thinking in my own head.

[Geezer]

Overcame faith, your original post indicates to me that you may be a Deist, or at least it seems you may embrace that way of thinking. Most Deist embraced the concepts associated with Deism long before they become familiar with the term Deist and the thinking associated with it.

 

My understanding of what I call the Sacred is virtually identical to what you refer to as spirituality. I see Deism as occupying the space between theism and atheism. Deism isn’t a religion although it is sometimes referred to as the “natural religion”. Deism rejects all revealed religions their deities and their sacred text as man made, but embraces creation, nature, and the laws of science and physics as part of the sacred.

 

Deist acknowledge there is no irrefutable evidence that even suggest there is anything like a supernatural realm or deity, but it also acknowledges that we don’t know what we don’t know and that our reality may not be all there is. Deist also often acknowledge the possibility that life and the universe may have been created rather than having come into existence as part of a natural occurrence. Many Deists accept the possibility there is more to creation than our technology is currently able to identify.

[Deva]

I can understand the frustration with a word such as "spirituality" for which there are various definitions.

 

For me, it is very close to aesthetics (an entire area of philosophy) and it also encompassed finding out who or what I am as opposed to what people tell me I am.

 

I also think there is a really good possibility that consciousness does not end with the death of the body. No, I can't prove it, but I think of life as this never ending process that we have to come to terms with. The teachings of Buddhism help me to do that.

 

What works for me obviously doesn't work for everyone. I think knowing this, and respecting each other, with our different views, is the order of the day.

[Ouroboros]

What's the evidence for you liking a piece of music? What's the evidence for you feeling happy when you look at a sunset? Even when you reduce emotions to science, chemicals, enumerations, and what-nots, the numbers don't really say what you feel, it only defines how your body process it. Nothing wrong with science and measure, but a number attached to a book explaining how your brain processes a feeling of reading a poem doesn't improve or alter the feeling you're having.

 

I like this analogy to describe that the way we feel about things can't always be explained by evidence. But I guess I don't consider liking music, enjoying a sunset or other experiences that make me feel happy to be 'spiritual' experiences. I just like them. Perhaps it just boils down to the way you define 'spiritual'. I don't know. I've never been much into philosophy.

 

Edit: I am trying to get a better understanding of 'spirituality' just to bump up against what I recognize is 'rigid' thinking in my own head.

I think we all define "spirituality" a bit different. Just like all other words in the dictionary, we have slightly different views on what they mean. Language isn't that hard-coded or rigid as most people think. It's a delusion to think that.

 

Have you ever listened to a piece of music that suddenly took you away and you totally stopped thinking about things around you. Suddenly someone says something or something happens and you are jerked back to "reality" and you realized you kind of was daydreaming? Some music can do that to me.

[Positivist]

What's the evidence for you liking a piece of music? What's the evidence for you feeling happy when you look at a sunset? Even when you reduce emotions to science, chemicals, enumerations, and what-nots, the numbers don't really say what you feel, it only defines how your body process it.

~~~~~

Realizing that you experiencing and living life is more than just numbers reduced by a scientific formula. Nothing wrong with the numbers or the formulas, but you're the emergent effect from the properties of the natural things, not just properties.

I'm kind of going through a positivist phase I think (hence my screen name). I am totally okay with neuroscientific explanations for why music transports me to cloud nine, and I am finding it essential to re-interpret my "God Days" through a neurotheological lens. If there isn't a neuroscientific explanation for the "God Buzz" I experienced, then there is only one explanation, and yet that explanation is highly problematic (people of all faiths get a type of "God Buzz").

 

I do not know what it means to be "spiritual" either which is why my definition is so broad. To me it is an internal inquiry about whether there is more to this life just our material existence.

I wonder what evolutionary purpose spirituality has served. Maybe it's a driver for hope, without which we would perish?

...my rigid thinking was part of an evolution of my post-Christianity mindset. It was necessary for a time.

I am a purely black and white thinker. My thinking is extremely rigid. If I had emraced gray, my faith might have survived. But for me, gray is like a seven-sided Rubix Cube with 41 colors. I think I actually need to re-wire my brain and develop new pathways so I can be gray, liberal and pluralistic.

The thing is though, to explain, I'm still an atheist. I have changed my view on what the definition of "spirituality" is. I think "spirituality" more of uplifting experiences in life.

~~~~~~

We all have our own paths to walk.

For me, I can explain the spiritual "feelings" in terms of neurology/neurotheology. And this is for me the door to pluralism--accepting that some people get their jollies from being a JW or from being a pagan--whatever floats their boat. Exclusivism (like in fundagelical Christianity) really pushes my buttons. I actually feel I am Right^TM in my new atheist beliefs; however, from my exit from Christianity, I know that the Feeling Of Being Right^TM is not the same thing as being Right^TM. Worse yet, maybe there is no Right^TM. This is nearly impossible for my mind to grasp. Gawd. I'm such a fundy.

I think we all define "spirituality" a bit different.

True. I see the term as describing the ineffable. To use the term to describe feelings seems a misappropriation of the term. But I'm probably wrong about that.

 

Does the fear of getting sucked in again by Nutters-R-Us ever go away?

[Vigile]

If I had emraced gray, my faith might have survived.

 

I don't mean any offense by this, but this is an odd thing to say. I only mention this because those with religious faith are generally such rigid, black and white thinkers. Why do you take a contrarian approach to this do you think? I'm personally someone who has always lived comfortably in shades of grey, which IMO is probably one reason why my faith didn't survive.

[Ouroboros]

True. I see the term as describing the ineffable. To use the term to describe feelings seems a misappropriation of the term. But I'm probably wrong about that.

It's not that you're right or wrong about it. If you start looking up definitions for the word, there are things showing up as "path to meaning of life", "discovery of one's essence", "contemplation over life's deepest meanings" etc. So it's more than just feelings. I just try to compare to feelings because you can't really measure a "feeling". Sure, you can explain the process and mechanics of a feeling, but in philosophy, there's been a struggle to merge the concepts of what you feel about things, the actual feeling itself, not the chemicals circling around, but that you actually describe and have words for feelings that technically don't exist. Feelings and consciousness arise from matter, energy, space, process, etc. But it's the result of all those things. Spirituality is something that's also arising the same way from nature and reality, the same way as feelings and consciousness.

 

Does the fear of getting sucked in again by Nutters-R-Us ever go away?

Only if you're starting to follow someone else and his or her opinion and views. Independence is what you are and should be. But it doesn't negate discussion. Just by the fact that you let yourself express your own ideas in contrast to others, you will evolve your own personal views.

[Galien]

 

 

I don't mean any offense by this, but this is an odd thing to say. I only mention this because those with religious faith are generally such rigid, black and white thinkers. Why do you take a contrarian approach to this do you think? I'm personally someone who has always lived comfortably in shades of grey, which IMO is probably one reason why my faith didn't survive.

 

I was always an extremely black and white thinker, until that way of looking at life was turned against me and almost finished me. I realised that there were so many other colours than just black and white. Exploring them all is interesting.

[Ouroboros]

I was always an extremely black and white thinker, until that way of looking at life was turned against me and almost finished me. I realised that there were so many other colours than just black and white. Exploring them all is interesting.

And no color is more "worthy" than any other color. Green isn't more or better color than red, blue, or yellow.

[Overcame Faith]

Overcame faith, your original post indicates to me that you may be a Deist, or at least it seems you may embrace that way of thinking. Most Deist embraced the concepts associated with Deism long before they become familiar with the term Deist and the thinking associated with it.

 

My understanding of what I call the Sacred is virtually identical to what you refer to as spirituality. I see Deism as occupying the space between theism and atheism. Deism isn’t a religion although it is sometimes referred to as the “natural religion”. Deism rejects all revealed religions their deities and their sacred text as man made, but embraces creation, nature, and the laws of science and physics as part of the sacred.

 

Deist acknowledge there is no irrefutable evidence that even suggest there is anything like a supernatural realm or deity, but it also acknowledges that we don’t know what we don’t know and that our reality may not be all there is. Deist also often acknowledge the possibility that life and the universe may have been created rather than having come into existence as part of a natural occurrence. Many Deists accept the possibility there is more to creation than our technology is currently able to identify.

 

I'm still thinking a lot of things through and undoubtedly will be engaged in such thought for the rest of my life. As for creation, I can't reject the possibility of some intelligence behind it (though I have yet to see convincing evidence of it) nor can I say it was all a purely physical phenomenon unguided by any intelligence. I simply do not have enough information either to reject or accept either possibility, though I will say that Science seems to be making major strides toward answering what happened on the physical level.

[Overcame Faith]

What Vigile said and also like that is deities exist, the onus is on them to prove their existence.

 

Spirituality is as broad a concepts as religion is and means anything to anybody. The former word probably is more honest as it cannot define a single concept whereas religion is pretty much understood to various forms of theism and creator gods.

 

Do I personally need it? Hell no. My logic and rationalism helps me along the way just fine. If there were any real evidence, I could change my perspective. As I only discuss these matters online and occasionally with my wife and son, it is NOT a big issue in meatspace. I would say I and my son are atheist and and my wife and daughter agnostic leaning to theism but probably more deists. The only time I would ever get into debates would be if one of my kids went batshit crazy like I did.

 

I agree that spirituality is a broad concept and, at least for me, extremely difficult to define. But I do not in any way, shape, or form equate what I am thinking about as a religion. which as you say, "...is pretty much understood to various forms of theism and creator gods."

 

I don't think I need any form of spirituality, either. But I am intrigued with the idea of exploring whether there is more to our lives than our mere physical existence. I would be shocked to learn (if one could ever learn it) that there is a deity who has anything to do with anything or, if there were one, whether it really matters to us. It seems to me that if there were such a deity and if its existence were important for us to know about, it would reveal itself to us in an unmistakable way. Since such an unmistakable revelation has not taken place, I remain unconvinced of the existence of a deity (though would be open to good evidence).