Religion,superstition and spirituality

Sarky

Geomy wrote: »

Yeah exactly I know it sounds like gibberish but sure a heavy metal fan might think listening to chamber music on Lyric Fm is Gibberish or 80's pop music is gibberish

Most metal fans have a deep appreciation for classical music. There are strong parallels, and many metal bands are noted for their use of classical techniques in their music.

They're still both a bunch of sounds strung together. There's nothing magic about either. Why do you think there is?

Geomy

sbsquarepants wrote: »

What the actual fúck does any of that mean?

If i look out to the Arran Islands - i see the Arran Islands (well usually not, i mostly see rain and mist). If i look at a cat, i see a cat. If i look at a tree, i see a tree. I could go on but i'm sure you get my point. All any of this proves is that my eyes are working!

One dimensional thinking that's what you have and it looks like you have f00k all creativity.

A tree is a tree,maybe you see a few hundred weight of timber too mate,and when you see a cow you call it dinner lol

Good man

IT-Guy

Geomy wrote: »

What evidence are you looking for ?

When you look out twoards the Arran Islands what do you see ?

What do you want to see ?

Seagulls,sea spray an offshore breeze combined with a westerly swell of 14 feet creating an epic scene of sweet surf....

Is it not enough to appreciate the beauty of a garden without having to believe there are fairies at the bottom of it?

Geomy

Sarky wrote: »

Geomy wrote: »

Most metal fans have a deep appreciation for classical music. There are strong parallels, and many metal bands are noted for their use of classical techniques in their music.

They're still both a bunch of sounds strung together. There's nothing magic about either. Why do you think there is?

Have a listen to Bucksfizz the land of make believe great tune that is :P

sbsquarepants

Geomy wrote: »

fatmammycat wrote: »

I like mindfulness spirituality and mysticism,and I enjoy talking to people about it....

I like kitkats. I like eating them mostly, but i have had the occasional kitkat based conversation. I'm not sure it proves anything fundamental about the nature of existence though.

Geomy

IT-Guy wrote: »

Is it not enough to appreciate the beauty of a garden without having to believe there are fairies at the bottom of it?

Maybe you will find one on top of a Christmas tree or wandering around the local park late at night

Geomy

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Geomy wrote: »

I like kitkats. I like eating them mostly, but i have had the occasional kitkat based conversation. I'm not sure it proves anything fundamental about the nature of existence though.

Is it a biscuit or a bar

sbsquarepants

Geomy wrote: »

One dimensional thinking that's what you have and it looks like you have f00k all creativity.

A tree is a tree,maybe you see a few hundred weight of timber too mate,and when you see a cow you call it dinner lol

Good man

Dinner is a terrible name for a cow. If i had a cow i'd call it kelly, after kelly brook (whose udders i greatly admire)
I'm not sure what you mean by 1 dimensional thinking, but if you mean not seeing things that aren't there - i'd take that as a compliment.

sbsquarepants

Geomy wrote: »

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Is it a biscuit or a bar

Ah here, we'll solve the god / no god debate before that one (although it's quite clearly a bar, but some deluded fools refuse to see what's in front of them!:D)

Knasher

maryrourke wrote: »

I am not a superstitious person. Spirituality? Not sure what that means. Though I do believe in/have a sense of (not all the time) of a good energy that seems to want things to be ok.

In my opinion spiritual people are generally people who believe in "something" but aren't specific enough to be put into a narrower category. It's a very vague catch-all category.

maryrourke wrote: »

That is a little bit on me---maybe I am deluded or something. So also maybe I can find if this is true by engaging in talking about stuff. So what is the main point/question here. I am not an intellectual but I like to open up--take that chance ---question my beliefs/brainwashing---and hopefully evolve to a better understanding of some kind of better truth. Jeesh I already sound confused---but this is the way I learn best.

Well if you want to question your beliefs, then your first step is define, as exactly as you can, what it is you believe and why you believe it.

Knasher

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Dinner is a terrible name for a cow. If i had a cow i'd call it kelly, after kelly brook (whose udders i greatly admire)

I grew up on a farm, one year we had a heifer who had some sort of balance issues, if she brought her head up more than 20cm off the ground, she would rear up on her hind legs and fall backwards. She also couldn't walk very far, so there is no way she would have survived if we left her out with the other animals, so we kept her inside her whole life.

We called her Brainy
(we are such sarcastic assholes).



Best steak I've ever had though.

IT-Guy

Geomy wrote: »

Maybe you will find one on top of a Christmas tree or wandering around the local park late at night

No prob with a depiction of a fairy on top of an Xmas tree but if I saw one in the local park late at night then I'd be certain I was pished drunk and hallucinating! Do you believe myths and legends to be descriptive of extinct creatures or simply fiction passed down as folklore?

sbsquarepants

Knasher wrote: »

Best steak I've ever had though.

You ate poor brainy! You're a monster.
I lived on a farm for a brief spell (my girlfriend at the time was working there) We adopted 2 pet lambs that were the runts of the litter so to speak, one was blind the other one was kind of twisted. We called them bendy and blindy. Poor old blindy didn't make it, but bendy grew up to be a very fine sheep indeed!:D

old hippy

IT-Guy wrote: »

No prob with a depiction of a fairy on top of an Xmas tree but if I saw one in the local park late at night then I'd be certain I was pished drunk and hallucinating! Do you believe myths and legends to be descriptive of extinct creatures or simply fiction passed down as folklore?

I think he's referring to someone on the cruise... :rolleyes:

nagirrac

Spirituality is an aspect of personal development. It does not have to involve a belief in God. Buddhists are arguably the most spiritually advanced humans and most Buddhists do not consider God.

We are all born as pure narcissists. A 2 year old is completely self absorbed and ruled by impulse. How we develop is almost entirely down to our environment, children raised by narcisstic parents (such as alcoholics), generally turn out to be both narcisstic themselves and frequently self destructive. Children raised by parents with healthy egos turn out generally to be well balanced. There is confusion regarding the term ego as it is often misconstrued as narcissism. The ego is simply your personality or conscious self, and a big ego as long as it is healthy, is a good thing. A healthy big ego results in being confident and having a healthy attitude towards life.

Spirituality involves becoming more aware of being part of something greater than yourself, a family, a community, a society, etc. It involves putting this awareness into action in terms of how you relate to others. Spiritual enlightment is the opposite of narcissism and is a worthy goal for humanity, regardless if one is a theist, deist or atheist.

Sarky

Please back up all of that.

Zombrex

"Spirituality" is a word primitive people used to describe a set of emotional experiences that they didn't understanding.

For example when you are in a church you might get a strong feeling of awe at the shapes and scale of the church. Before people knew why this happened they simply classified it as a "spiritual" experience. We now know that it is caused by the pleasing relationships and scales that invoke a pleasing sensation in the brain.

Really "sprituality" is just a place holder term of the ignorant, something we used to describe something before we understood what was actually happening.

robindch

nagirrac wrote: »

Spirituality is an aspect of personal development. It does not have to involve a belief in God. Buddhists are arguably the most spiritually advanced humans and most Buddhists do not consider God.

We are all born as pure narcissists. A 2 year old is completely self absorbed and ruled by impulse. How we develop is almost entirely down to our environment, children raised by narcisstic parents (such as alcoholics), generally turn out to be both narcisstic themselves and frequently self destructive. Children raised by parents with healthy egos turn out generally to be well balanced. There is confusion regarding the term ego as it is often misconstrued as narcissism. The ego is simply your personality or conscious self, and a big ego as long as it is healthy, is a good thing. A healthy big ego results in being confident and having a healthy attitude towards life.

Spirituality involves becoming more aware of being part of something greater than yourself, a family, a community, a society, etc. It involves putting this awareness into action in terms of how you relate to others. Spiritual enlightment is the opposite of narcissism and is a worthy goal for humanity, regardless if one is a theist, deist or atheist.

That post cries out for a [Citation Needed] sticker at least half a mile high and not just because Freud and his peculiar ideas have been universally abandoned by serious researchers years ago.

Nodin

nagirrac wrote: »

...........

Spirituality involves becoming more aware of being part of something greater than yourself, a family, a community, a society, etc. It involves putting this awareness into action in terms of how you relate to others. Spiritual enlightment is the opposite of narcissism and is a worthy goal for humanity, regardless if one is a theist, deist or atheist.

...in theory. In practice it leads to crystals, incense, feathers and vagueness.

nagirrac

robindch wrote: »

That post cries out for a [Citation Needed] sticker at least half a mile high and not just because Freud and his peculiar ideas have been universally abandoned by serious researchers years ago.

Everything I have said is based on modern Psychology. The fact that you cite Freud demonstrates you don't even recognize the field involved in spiritual study, let alone the subject matter. The field of study is called Transpersonal Psychology and if it has father figures, those would be William James and Carl Jung. Yes, the field has moved on a lot since their time, the leading modern day thinker in the field would be Ken Wilber. If you haven't read anything by him, I would recommend "A Theory of Everything" as a good introduction to his work.

nagirrac

Nodin wrote: »

...in theory. In practice it leads to crystals, incense, feathers and vagueness.

..for some. Would you include "the practice" i.e. meditation on that list?

nagirrac

Zombrex wrote: »

Really "sprituality" is just a place holder term of the ignorant, something we used to describe something before we understood what was actually happening.

Ignorant is dismissing something you do not understand.

Let's check your knowledge on something that is "understood". Could you explain in detail what is happening to people who have mystical experiences and include the evidence backing up your understanding.

Please mention the God Helmet, just for me.

nagirrac

Sarky wrote: »

Please back up all of that.

Before doing so, and to ensure I am not wasting my time:

Do you agree that we have learned and continue to learn much about the human condition from the various fields of Psychology?

Aineoil

"A Theory of Everything" looks like a great read, I wish it were true

Maybe I'll sound very stupid on this thread but is there theory to everything? My son was born on the 18th of July 1997 and his granddad (my father-in-law) died on the 18th of July 1985 - where's the theory in that, other than a co-incidence of dates.....just open to opinions here.
It's strange that the dates co-inside and we were trying for a baby for 8 years. We never had any other babies after our son was born despite many efforts. We are now in our late forties so the chance of having any more babies are nil.

I would like to think I am spiritual, I am not religious but I have to tow the line in a religious way as I live (and work) in a small community and have to be seen to go to mass etc. Don't judge me too harshly, I try to keep the status quo and not upset family members. I don't want to be a hypocrite, but sometimes it's the easier road to follow.

Nodin

nagirrac wrote: »

..for some. Would you include "the practice" i.e. meditation on that list?

...for people who are hippies new age spiritual? Yeah. Along with a book about how christianity is a mushroom cult and one on celtic mysticism.

nagirrac

Aineoil wrote: »

Maybe I'll sound very stupid on this thread but is there theory to everything? My son was born on the 18th of July 1997 and his granddad (my father-in-law) died on the 18th of July 1985 - where's the theory in that, other than a co-incidence of dates.....

What you have described is called a synchronicity, a meaningful coincidence. Meaningful to you that is. It was first described by Carl Jung where he encountered a number of meaningful coincidences between what his patients were dreaming and actual later occurances.

It gets dismissed, like all suggestions of spirituality, by many on this forum as you would expect.

nagirrac

Nodin wrote: »

...for people who are hippies new age spiritual? Yeah. Along with a book about how christianity is a mushroom cult and one on celtic mysticism.

Are all Buddhists on that list?

There is strong evidence that all religions came from mushrooms and other naturally occuring psychedelics.

Eramen

Zombrex wrote: »

"Spirituality" is a word primitive people used to describe a set of emotional experiences that they didn't understanding.

For example when you are in a church you might get a strong feeling of awe at the shapes and scale of the church. Before people knew why this happened they simply classified it as a "spiritual" experience. We now know that it is caused by the pleasing relationships and scales that invoke a pleasing sensation in the brain.

Really "sprituality" is just a place holder term of the ignorant, something we used to describe something before we understood what was actually happening.

'Spirituality' is simply the world understood through non-material means, i.e. systems of ideas for example.

I know most modern atheists believe that this term/state of being is just the play of the brain/emotions in some form, all existing within the head, yet this idea is just an assumption with no evidence at all to render it feasible.

The 'consciousness in the head' theory is rather a stay-over of previous thinking from times where where the soul was thought to reside in the head. Of course, there is no basis that full consciousness has to do with brain activity at all, it's just a dogma. A dogma increasingly under pressure from modern consciousness studies.

Atheists seem to have accepted this as a sacred cow from what I can observe. Conscious activity makes our reality, its the interpreter of time, evidence, logic, math and much more. The conscious being has always been the true observer in a relational world, where each material object gains it's value via its relationship with other objects, where value comes from the intelligence, mind, ideas etc and other non-material sources.

Even evidence doesn't gain meaning until we form it through the conscious experience. We should see spirituality in this context.

nozzferrahhtoo

Aineoil wrote: »

My son was born on the 18th of July 1997 and his granddad (my father-in-law) died on the 18th of July 1985 - where's the theory in that, other than a co-incidence of dates.....just open to opinions here.

"Coincidence of dates" is a lot more common than many people realise. What really fraks with peoples heads is when you ask them how many people you need to have in a room for the probability of any two of them sharing a birthday to be 50:50.

The most common answer I get is "365/2" which is 183ish and some people for some reason think the way to go is "365/4".

When you tell them the answer is merely 23 people.... I have seen (on only one occasion but still) eyes literally cross in confusion.

Whatever day someone dies on that you know... if you know 23 or more people it is even odds that you will know someone who was born on that day too. If you know 57 people the odds are around 99/100.

nagirrac

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

"Coincidence of dates" is a lot more common than many people realise. What really fraks with peoples heads is when you ask them how many people you need to have in a room for the probability of any two of them sharing a birthday to be 50:50.

The most common answer I get is "365/2" which is 183ish and some people for some reason think the way to go is "365/4".

When you tell them the answer is merely 23 people.... I have seen (on only one occasion but still) eyes literally cross in confusion.

..and what's even more interesting is that this mental exercise is a perfect example of the difference between a coincidence and a synchronicity.

If you had say 15 people in a room, and two of them had the same birthday you would say that was a coincidence, as it is not that far from the expected even chance of it happening (23 people). However, if you nozzferrahhtoo were in a room of 15 people and someone had the same birthday as you, you could claim that as a synchronicity (if you were so inclined), as the even odds of that happening is in a roomful of 183 people. A synchronicity is a meaningful coincidence to the person involved.