Anyone else know people who say this and find it really annoying?

Views: 2491

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Yes its annoying

Because a person that says im Spiritual is actually saying...

I'm more enlightened then everyone else and im so individually aware of things beyond anyone else's comprehension i cant even explain it properly.

It's condescending to religious and nonreligious alike.

I recently reconnected with one of my high school friends over dinner. She said she was "nonreligious, but spiritual." I asked her what that meant. She then kindly informed me that 1) the universe has a soul 2) it is watching us 3) the earth itself is a singular living organism, and 4) people are a disease, and AIDS is the earth's immune system. I said "Are you speaking metaphorically?" 

But of course, she wasn't. This whole "nonreligious, but spiritual" thing is just an excuse for people who want to wear the nonconformist label by rejecting mainstream religion, but still hold on to their personal share of batshit crazy. Why reject religion if you're going to then ascribe to equally untenable positions?

Totally. Irrational is as irrational does. This story of yours particularly disturbs me. People seem to think humanity is some sort of "unnatural" life form. That our technology is bad for the earth, which it can be. But why not be positive. Techno optimistic and realize that our science and technology are also what is going to save the earth. These spiritualists are often the people who will tell you that "science doesn't have all the answers" no shit...who said it does?

Mostly what "I'm not religious but I'm spiritual" really means is "I'm so bright that I made up my own religion. It's not one of the dumb religions other people believe that have names. It's MY PERSONAL religion."

What do you base this on?  To me, you sound no different than the people who make up shit about atheists being baby-eating, devil worshippers based off the three supposed atheists they've met.

While I'm not a proponent of 'spiritualism', I can't for the life of me understand why you would make such far reaching statements.  I'd like to see some resource beyond your own opinion backing up your statements.  Specifically, it's the 'mostly' that concerns me.  Where does that come from?  Is it all strictly anecdotal, or do you have something more substantial?

I'm sure is speaking from his own experience. Is that not good enough? It certainly is for me. I don't expect one to have done extensive studies to enter a conversation with said person.

the word "mostly"... bothers you? What if I said mostly all Christians believe what they have learned from religion is all that they will ever need to know? That would be from my own experience as well.

When it comes to the word "spirituality" MOST people are thinking of or pertaining to the spirit. Do I have to perform a study and have this scientifically proven or can we just agree that i'm right?

Point is, none of the conversations on this board would get very far if everything needed scientific backing before you could say it. And what would be the point in discussing anything.. we would be better off simply sharing links to scientific papers.

When it comes to the word "spirituality" MOST people are thinking of or pertaining to the spirit. Do I have to perform a study and have this scientifically proven or can we just agree that i'm right?


That depends which of the couple dozen definitions of "spirit" you're using this time.

The soul...

Because by literal definition that's what it implies.

I think you know the most common definition of spirituality is the "of or pertaining to the soul..." one I think you are making a point more towards that you think that is irrelevant.

I think you know the most common definition of spirituality is the "of or pertaining to the soul

No. I don't know that. In fact, I've NEVER heard anyone use the phrase "I'm spiritual" in any way that implies "of or pertaining to the soul".

If that were the case, "I'm spiritual but not religious" would literally mean "I'm of or pertaining to the soul, but not religious" which is a nonsensical sentence.

Spirituality is a very difficult to define term. People who self-label as a specific religion use it. Non-religious believers use it. Non-believers use it. Obviously, they all use it in very different ways. There is no "most common" definition amongst all the groups of people who use the term.

If that were the case, "I'm spiritual but not religious" would literally mean "I'm of or pertaining to the soul, but not religious" which is a nonsensical sentence.

Yeah, but the word tends to be used by people who aren't very logical, engage in magical thinking, and throw words around more for effect than to explain themselves.

Besides, taking people literally is only one of several ways to take them. I think you'll find that most people who are self-proclaimed spiritualists also believe in some quasi-religious and hare-brained concepts like astral projection and channeling, both of which require a concept of the soul (or a belief in ghosts). They also often bandy about half-baked notions borrowed from Eastern religions, even though they might claim not to be religious.

...the word tends to be used by people who aren't very logical, engage in magical thinking, and throw words around more for effect than to explain themselves.

This has not been my experience. All the "spiritual but not religious" people I know tend to be more logical, and better critical thinkers than the majority of highly religious people I know.


Also, "spiritualist" and "spiritualism" is not the same as spiritual, much in the same way "gnostic" is not the same as "gnosticism."

let's look at urbandictionary.com...

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=spirituality

The definition i'm referring to has 69 up votes and 23 down.. surprisingly enough some form of the definition you attribute to spirituality is listed on the site. Unsurprisingly there are only 5 upvotes of people who subscribe to it... regardless... at the very least. According to urbandictionary.com the definition we're referring to in this thread is reigning supreme. As I think we all know it would in any other scenerio anyway.

RSS

Support T|A

Think Atheist is 100% member supported

All proceeds go to keeping Think Atheist online.

Donate with Dogecoin

Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

Services we love

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Into life hacks? Check out LabMinions.com

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

© 2014   Created by Dan.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service