Why do so many people want to devoid life of a spiritual meaning

Aongus Von Bismarck

We live in a world where consumerism and individualism have become almost doctrine. It’s a world that I’ve navigated well in my career, but as I get older, I’ve started to realise that the spiritual aspect of one’s existence is extremely important. The lack of it is referred to in some pop psychology circles as the ‘God Hole’. There’s a reason people are riddled with anxiety, depression, and loneliness. And in debt.

I’ve been practising mindfulness meditation for the past 8 years, and I can think of no other activity that has brought me more benefit, joy, and serenity. It’s 10 minutes of bliss twice per day. There’s a lot of people who feel they need to subscribe to Headspace, Calm, or one of those McMindfulness apps. There isn’t.

There’s a wonderfully simple app called Oak that does all you need. Or visit the folk on https://mindfulness.ie/ They are carrying out guided meditation sessions on Zoom each evening. All you need is a chair.

jobeenfitz

Drumpot wrote: »

I’d argue most people have a belief in some sort of nonsense and it’s a bit disingenuous to suggest religion is anymore nonsense then a lot of things we just accept as part of life. I think most people tell themselves a story that they aren’t going to die. I sell life assurance and nobody ever thinks they will need to be claiming. It’s only one example where people tell themselves a lie to just get by. The way some people live (over eat, drink and just not taking care of themselves) you can tell there is zero thought given to where that will end.

Regardless of your proclivity, desiring more crap and being a slave consumerist is the biggest nonsense and shallowist existence I can imagine possible. I’m as much a consumerist as anybody here but I’m conscious of the absurdity of it. Consumerism is effectively a religion at this stage. Look at Black Friday, people stampeding each other to buy crap they don’t need.

Religion will just be replaced with something probably even more damaging and less spiritual.

I’m not religious but I do try to be more Spiritual. To me, it’s a very conscious contact I have at times with nature. My dog, walking in a Forrest or open field. Even enjoying a simple interaction watching my wife and children talk. Simple pleasures that hurt nobody, really enjoy the moment with an acceptance that this could be gone at any moment. I sometimes have conversations with my dead dad in my head because I miss him and I find it comforting to remember and think about him. If I take a scientific approach I just discard this idea as a stupid placebo type delusion to make myself feel a bit better or miss him less, what benefit is there to that?

I find the attack of religion quite often misguided, as I’ve said humans are the cause of the corruption of everything.

I sometimes attack religion because I believe its a "made up load of sh1t". Made up by humans, obviously without proof. It should be attacked and scoffed at just like a belief in fairies should. I grew up in Ireland in 1960s/1970s when the grubby Cathiolic church held too much power over us. I wish the brits had wiped them out.

I think people who defend religion are misguided and brainwashed.

Kylta

jobeenfitz wrote: »

I sometimes attack religion because I believe its a "made up load of sh1t". Made up by humans, obviously without proof. It should be attacked and scoffed at just like a belief in fairies should. I grew up in Ireland in 1960s/1970s when the grubby Cathiolic church held too much powepr over us. I wish the brits had wiped them out.

I think people who defend religion are misguided and brainwashed.

Ahhhh. What do you mean by fairies don't exist! Your mad you, next you'll be saying santa doesn't exist or the poor easter bunny. I suppose milkmaid mary who stole my virginity doesn't exist either. How cold you just made my world and in the summer too

completedit

completedit wrote: »

We should leave space as part of the human experience for such thoughts. But should be separated from the state but has to be done in a way that connects kids to the spiritual past and our inherent wonder that science doesn't explain and shouldn't attempt to invade.

I'll compromise, and agree with you, but only for kids and only up until 10 to 11 years old, and only for Santa Claus. Deal?

Wavelet50

Wavelet50 wrote: »

Spirituality exists outside of religion, I don't believe in a God in the sky, but I believe in spirituality.

In addition to meditation that has already been recommended, I would also recommend a dopamine detox. Eliminate anything that gives you a spike of dopamine, masturbation, junk food, sweets, fizzy drinks, television, your smartphone and so on. Spirituality is finding joy outside of these instant pleasures

And actual sex too? I'm going to pass on this spirituality as well, thanks.

Wavelet50

Wavelet50 wrote: »

Yes sex too. It doesn't have to be permanent, long enough for you to lose your dependence on such pleasures.

I suspect this is was a factor in the origin of Ramadan and Lent.

'Dependence on such pleasures'

Sounds like a cult, I'm out.

8kczg9v0swrydm

I can just share my 2 cent as a practicing Catholic.

There is absolutely nothing, or no one, who has changed my life as much as Jesus Christ. Words cannot describe the joy, fulfillment and peace which come daily through a personal relationship with Him. He is my rock, my strength, my everything. Through Him, I find that life has colour, meaning and zest. For Him, I want to be better, kinder, more helpful and more forgiving to other people - I want His words to forever linger in my mind.

Wasn't always like that though. Used to kind of go through the motions when I was young, but when I went to college, I started to read the Bible. That is when the Mass, prayer, Confession and the moral life all started making sense.

Jaxton Jealous Suspense

Jaxton Jealous Suspense wrote: »

I can just share my 2 cent as a practicing Catholic.

There is absolutely nothing, or no one, who has changed my life as much as Jesus Christ. Words cannot describe the joy, fulfillment and peace which come daily through a personal relationship with Him. He is my rock, my strength, my everything. Through Him, I find that life has colour, meaning and zest. For Him, I want to be better, kinder, more helpful and more forgiving to other people - I want His words to forever linger in my mind.

Wasn't always like that though. Used to kind of go through the motions when I was young, but when I went to college, I started to read the Bible. That is when the Mass, prayer, Confession and the moral life all started making sense.

When you had this RTD experience while reading the bible do you mean the NT? Because how anyone apathetic could read the OT and become religious is beyond me. I can somewhat see the appeal of the NT, but the OT is almost childish when looked at from a grown up perspective.

8kczg9v0swrydm

Deleted User wrote: »

When you had this RTD experience while reading the bible do you mean the NT? Because how anyone apathetic could read the OT and become religious is beyond me. I can somewhat see the appeal of the NT, but the OT is almost childish when looked at from a grown up perspective.

Hi Chinese whospers,

Admittedly, yes it was the NT that I read. The OT can be a lot tougher, but it is also massively rewarding when studied (you would need a good commentary for this). Moreover, it has some beautiful passages:

But Zion said, “The LORD has forsaken me; the Lord has forgotten me!”
“Can a woman forget her nursing child,
or lack compassion for the son of her womb?
Even if she could forget,
I will not forget you!
Behold, I have inscribed you on the palms of My hands;
your walls are ever before Me.

(Isaiah 49)

Set me as a seal on your heart, as a seal on your arm: for love is strong as death; jealousy is cruel as the grave: the coals thereof are coals of fire, which has a most vehement flame. Mighty waters cannot quench love; rivers cannot sweep it away. If a man were to give all the wealth of his house for love, his offer would be utterly scorned.

(Song of Songs 8)

Zebra3

Jaxton Jealous Suspense wrote: »

I can just share my 2 cent as a practicing Catholic.

There is absolutely nothing, or no one, who has changed my life as much as Jesus Christ. Words cannot describe the joy, fulfillment and peace which come daily through a personal relationship with Him. He is my rock, my strength, my everything. Through Him, I find that life has colour, meaning and zest. For Him, I want to be better, kinder, more helpful and more forgiving to other people - I want His words to forever linger in my mind.

Wasn't always like that though. Used to kind of go through the motions when I was young, but when I went to college, I started to read the Bible. That is when the Mass, prayer, Confession and the moral life all started making sense.

Pity that you believe all that stuff yet are a member of an organisation that has committed and covered up horrific crimes against women and children.

JohnnyFlash

Zebra3 wrote: »

Pity that you believe all that stuff yet are a member of an organisation that has committed and covered up horrific crimes against women and children.

You’re a SF supporter. The IRA murdered women and children.

Stop pontificating all the time.

One eyed Jack

Zebra3 wrote: »

Pity that you believe all that stuff yet are a member of an organisation that has committed and covered up horrific crimes against women and children.

Wasn’t it people within the organisation that committed those crimes though? And people within the organisation who covered up for those people who committed those crimes, and turned a blind eye to the ill treatment of people who themselves were, and still are, members of the same organisation? My point is that it wasn’t the organisation is at fault, it’s the small minority of people within the organisation you’re referring to, I would say the small number of people within any organisation, who have their own agenda going on.

It doesn’t mean that the organisation is at fault, or that all the members of the organisation can be or should be held accountable or responsible for the crimes committed by the small minority of people within the organisation who committed criminal acts and subjected people to ill treatment and abuse. What you’re attempting to suggest is akin to suggesting that the son is responsible for the sins of the father. That’s really not how accountability and responsibility work. Individuals are responsible for their own actions.

4068ac1elhodqr

Any organisation, cult, ideology or group is capable of such crimes.
It boils down to a matter of access, influence, control and ultimately too much power over people.

You only have to look at Scouting Ireland to spot a similar scandal to the RCC over recent years.
Also take a look across in Eng, where the (mainly) Pakistani (muslim, but not really practising) grooming gangs, have ran amock on a huge scale.
Then there's the elites, politicians, royals and so on, often self-serving headonist types themselves.

Kaybaykwah

NIMAN wrote: »

I just think that it's not so much people trying to take anything away from life, but they aren't prepared to believe in something they consider nonsense to make their life seem more fulfilling or special.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Wasn’t it people within the organisation that committed those crimes though? And people within the organisation who covered up for those people who committed those crimes, and turned a blind eye to the ill treatment of people who themselves were, and still are, members of the same organisation? My point is that it wasn’t the organisation is at fault, it’s the small minority of people within the organisation you’re referring to, I would say the small number of people within any organisation, who have their own agenda going on.

It doesn’t mean that the organisation is at fault, or that all the members of the organisation can be or should be held accountable or responsible for the crimes committed by the small minority of people within the organisation who committed criminal acts and subjected people to ill treatment and abuse. What you’re attempting to suggest is akin to suggesting that the son is responsible for the sins of the father. That’s really not how accountability and responsibility work. Individuals are responsible for their own actions.

Yes, not to put everyone in the same basket, and yet, most good Catholics were aware of the Magdalen Laundries in the past. The pious were indeed OK with doing away with the girls gone wrong, knocked up by a priest and shunned for life. The sins of the Church were unquestioned, they were part and parcel of the system that was deemed unquestionable because that is what faith requires. So. No, it is not just a happy few in the hierarchy who abuse, but all who avert their eyes from gross injustice meted out by same.

ressem

Perhaps some of the religions ought to clean up the contradictions in their teachings, and dump the ill-deserved "perfect, divinely inspired" reviews they attach to their scriptures.
Treating the old testament as a tribal history, rather than a valuable guide to life.
Because it's just too easy for a malevolent would-be leader to cherry-pick.
And beautiful passages can be made about wars and sieges and plagues.

The claims of Judaic based religions and others have been used as excuses for atrocities and prejudices to physically attack members of other spiritual groups for millennia now. So I suppose trying to attach the false tag of "religion" (or cult) onto the scientific method and those that use it shouldn't surprise.

In Ireland's current culture that places some restrictions on hate-mongering, you'll still have homilies about the spiritual dangers of yoga, mindfulness and other "fads" that are popularized / commercialised out of other religions.

The religious bits that encourage self-improvement and self-discipline can get a recommendation of practice from the scientific method through trial and recording results.

One eyed Jack

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Wasn’t it people within the organisation that committed those crimes though? And people within the organisation who covered up for those people who committed those crimes, and turned a blind eye to the ill treatment of people who themselves were, and still are, members of the same organisation? My point is that it wasn’t the organisation is at fault, it’s the small minority of people within the organisation you’re referring to, I would say the small number of people within any organisation, who have their own agenda going on.

It doesn’t mean that the organisation is at fault, or that all the members of the organisation can be or should be held accountable or responsible for the crimes committed by the small minority of people within the organisation who committed criminal acts and subjected people to ill treatment and abuse. What you’re attempting to suggest is akin to suggesting that the son is responsible for the sins of the father. That’s really not how accountability and responsibility work. Individuals are responsible for their own actions.

the same holds true for good works.

people do things. jesus doesnt change anybody's life. they change their own life through a framework suggested to them with a set of handy parables and a couple of vague basic instructions.

jesus, yoga, atkins or agile- whatever concept/philosophy/tool moves you, great.

it doesnt make them conscious deities.

but you certainly can't claim that jesus is real and responsible for only the good bits- there's a reason that church philosophers have had themselves in a (thoroughly unconvincing) tangle for centuries over that principle.

DanielODonnell

I am OK with non existence after I die, I can't imagine any after life would be suitable for me anyway, I can't socialise and I am uncomfortable around humans so how will that end in an an after life. Non existence is OK for me just like before I was born, you can't be afraid of that, being afraid of death is like being afraid of the 1980s, I time when I didn't exist, there was no pain in the 1980s for me. If God wishes me to me at peace in his heaven he will need to give me a new brain, simple as that.

You'll live on in your music Daniel..

i57dwun4yb1pt8

DanielODonnell wrote: »

I am OK with non existence after I die, I can't imagine any after life would be suitable for me anyway, I can't socialise and I am uncomfortable around humans so how will that end in an an after life. Non existence is OK for me just like before I was born, you can't be afraid of that, being afraid of death is like being afraid of the 1980s, I time when I didn't exist, there was no pain in the 1980s for me. If God wishes me to me at peace in his heaven he will need to give me a new brain, simple as that.

sure picked the wrong career then , eh ?

jobeenfitz

DanielODonnell wrote: »

I am OK with non existence after I die, I can't imagine any after life would be suitable for me anyway, I can't socialise and I am uncomfortable around humans so how will that end in an an after life. Non existence is OK for me just like before I was born, you can't be afraid of that, being afraid of death is like being afraid of the 1980s, I time when I didn't exist, there was no pain in the 1980s for me. If God wishes me to me at peace in his heaven he will need to give me a new brain, simple as that.

Most people have a fear of death. Some have fear of after death. I think this could be a big factor in them believing in religion. I'm not looking forward to death but I have no worries about being dead.

I believed in God when I was young because of parents, teachers, priests and nuns. I was thought by nuns in secondary school. Also fear was a factor in my belief.

I just can't believe there's a god, without proof.

Is there higher powers? Did the big bang happen, what caused it to hapen? Hopefully mankind will eventually know these things.

One eyed Jack

[Deleted User] wrote: »

the same holds true for good works.

people do things. jesus doesnt change anybody's life. they change their own life through a framework suggested to them with a set of handy parables and a couple of vague basic instructions.

jesus, yoga, atkins or agile- whatever concept/philosophy/tool moves you, great.

it doesnt make them conscious deities.

but you certainly can't claim that jesus is real and responsible for only the good bits- there's a reason that church philosophers have had themselves in a (thoroughly unconvincing) tangle for centuries over that principle.

Well, I could, in just the same way as critics of anything can claim the opposite - either side is only looking at any idea from the perspective that suits their argument. If their beliefs inspire them to do good, then I’m good with that. If they want to attribute responsibility for their good deeds to a deity, I’m ok with that too. If someone is claiming that their ill deeds or attitudes towards others is inspired by their beliefs, or they attribute responsibility for their ill behaviour to a deity, then I’d have an issue with their claims.

Consider for example the case of Jan Broberg, a devout Mormon who was kidnapped as a child by another member of the Mormon Church, who had her believe she was an alien, and that she must have sex with him. It was because of how she was raised as a Mormon that she was able to forgive him and move on with her life, and to this day is still a very active member in her Church. She chooses to focus on the positives and if that’s what she finds peace in, I’m certainly not of a mind to try and undermine her beliefs.

I’d be the same with Ben Carson, a devout Seventh Day Adventist and pioneering neurosurgeon who attributes his gifts to God, and there’s no doubt the guy is gifted. He’s doing incredible work, and if he attributes the source of his inspiration for being able to do so to a deity, I’m ok with that.

If a couple of Muslims break into an office in France and take out a couple of journalists in the name of their God, then I’m not ok with that, nor am I ok with it being used as an example to tar Muslims as though though the actions of the minority represent the values of the majority. I’d be the same with anyone who would suggest that the malicious actions of a minority within the Catholic Church, within any Church, within any organisation, represent the values of the majority of members of the organisation in question.

I’d be the same if anyone were to try and argue that science and spirituality are conflicting ideals. They’re not, because they’re two completely distinct concepts with their own branches of knowledge and understanding - science relates to that which is observable. Philosophy or spirituality relates to that which isn’t observable, but it is true what you say that Church philosophers have tied themselves up in rather unconvincing knots trying to untangle that principle, and the same is true of scientific philosophers who have tried to do the same thing, only from their perspective. I think that’s where the OP is coming from, that there are a growing number of people who don’t fully understand science, and argue that it is somehow superior to spirituality, as though the two concepts are in conflict.

That’s why we find ourselves in circumstances now where a 16 year old child is punted around the globe and paraded in front of political world leaders berating them like any spoilt child would who isn’t getting her own way and failing to understand why people won’t just “listen to the scientists”. I’m guessing she isn’t referring to the Government scientist in the UK who was advising Boris, and then proceeded as though his own scientific evidence didn’t apply to him.

eviltwin

I'm not religious and I don't consider myself to be spiritual either. It hasn't left a void in my life. I get great peace of mind from listening to a good album, doing some gardening or going for a run. It's good to cleanse the mind but there are many ways to do so.

Kylta

DanielODonnell wrote: »

I am OK with non existence after I die, I can't imagine any after life would be suitable for me anyway, I can't socialise and I am uncomfortable around humans so how will that end in an an after life. Non existence is OK for me just like before I was born, you can't be afraid of that, being afraid of death is like being afraid of the 1980s, I time when I didn't exist, there was no pain in the 1980s for me. If God wishes me to me at peace in his heaven he will need to give me a new brain, simple as that.

Sorry mate only hell awaits country and western singers, try sing some reggae and you just might get to hi hi hi heaven mon

upupup

Kylta wrote: »

Sorry mate only hell awaits country and western singers, try sing some reggae and you just might get to hi hi hi heaven mon

Johnny the fiddle player kicked the devils ass!

"The Devil bowed his head because he knew that he'd been beat
And he laid that golden fiddle on the ground at Johnny's feet
Johnny said, "Devil, just come on back if you ever wanna try again
I done told you once--you son of a bitch--I'm the best there's ever been."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzuYKwIcuKk

B.A._Baracus

Woke Hogan wrote: »

I’m totally areligious but that being said I acknowledge that pretty much every known society and culture throughout history has had some sort of tradition of believing in a higher power. Therefore I would define it to be as much a part of the human condition as enjoying music or any kind of storytelling.

That’s why I always laugh at the sneering fat internet atheists you see on websites such as this. Declaring themselves to be “people of science” despite the fact that their own scientific nous extends only as far as what a pop scientist like Brian Cox told them in some podcast for arseholes.

The kind of people who pride themselves on trusting “facts” and “logic” but who also ignore their doctors warnings about controlling their blood sugar by eating two kilos of sugar every weekend.

Well said. Total agree

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

completedit wrote: »

The religion of science in the hands of those not smart enough to truly understand it is every bit as scary as anything that has come before it.

Why do religious people have this deep desire, to pretend they know the unknowable in this life?

Is it really that hard to live and enjoy your life, without having answers to all the big questions in the universe? Why do you actually have to know who/or what created us, in order to live a good life, be a decent person and enjoy what's out there for you?

I find faith to be one of the most arrogant positions that anyone can take in this life... to say you know who/what created us, and to then compound this further by saying you don't require any evidence to prove your wild assertions... :rolleyes:... No thanks, not for me!

Mostly, I just don't get why anyone needs to believe in a god to enjoy their life and live a good life. I certainly don't need faith... I see it as a character flaw in most people. It's a sign of weakness from my perspective, when I see people who need faith to guide them in this life. Each to their own and all that jazz... but I personally feel a bit sorry for most religious people. (including all the people into those wacky faith healers and energy BS)

If you can't navigate this world without these types of crutches... you've got problems in my book. No offence intended btw. Just my humble opinion!

Warbeastrior

Has anyone else noticed that a lot of athiests and non spiritual individuals seem to love to attack the beliefs of others.
I know that some people who do believe may rub some people up the wrong way but in my experience, it's a lot more prevalent seeing people who aren't spiritual bothering the spiritualistic.
Ricky Gervais is one example. Fair enough if you don't believe but why feel the need to talk bad about something that is very important to some people.

Fourier

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I think that’s where the OP is coming from, that there are a growing number of people who don’t fully understand science, and argue that it is somehow superior to spirituality, as though the two concepts are in conflict.

That’s why we find ourselves in circumstances now where a 16 year old child is punted around the globe and paraded in front of political world leaders berating them like any spoilt child would who isn’t getting her own way and failing to understand why people won’t just “listen to the scientists”. I’m guessing she isn’t referring to the Government scientist in the UK who was advising Boris, and then proceeded as though his own scientific evidence didn’t apply to him.

This makes very little sense to me.

The fact that there are people who think science is superior to spirituality is why we have people like Greta Thunberg?

People then won't listen to what she says, which mostly aligns with what scientists say, because of what? Because there is a growing number of people who think science is superior so that's not a reason to seriously take in evidence of what needs to be done about Global Warming (makes little sense)? Or because a UK scientist from another discipline was hypocritical (also makes little sense)?

I don't really get the link between the three groups here, it just seems like a grab bag of vaguely related current events.

B.A._Baracus

Warbeastrior wrote: »

Has anyone else noticed that a lot of athiests and non spiritual individuals seem to love to attack the beliefs of others.
I know that some people who do believe may rub some people up the wrong way but in my experience, it's a lot more prevalent seeing people who aren't spiritual bothering the spiritualistic.
Ricky Gervais is one example. Fair enough if you don't believe but why feel the need to talk bad about something that is very important to some people.

Yeah. You see a lot of that on boards.
Probably not as bad as it was a few years ago. As hard as that could be to believe.

You'd often have people saying "oh so you believe in the flying spaghetti monster?" - like what a downright dick thing to say to someone of faith.

There was once a thread in after hours saying how people who didn't believe in God were smarter than those who do. Que all the athiests agreeing. Pathetic looking bad as everyone was just blowing themselves out. Like one big circle jerk.

Warbeastrior

That's exactly the type of stuff B.A.
I would have faith but I'd never go onto a forum and start criticising or making fun of someone for not.