The Spiritual Atheist..

If the purpose of speech is to convey a message. And an atheist calls himself spiritual. Isn't that person misrepresenting himself by using a word that is most largely viewed to be synonymous with "soul"? Even if he himself has his own unique meaning for it (which takes a 5 minute video to understand)

Let's be honest most people hear the word spirit and think soul.. don't they?

It seems like a way of justifying for no reason. If there is a lack of a better word... make a new one. To me I find that people are kind of ridiculed or perceived in a derogatory way if they admit or "come out" with believing they do not have a soul. Like you are somehow less of a person, lacking mystery, etc.. So when someone tries to find a convoluted means of explaining why they call themselves "spiritual". I feel that they are pandering to this unfortunate misperception.

Views: 2158

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

agreed... I suggested in a previous thread using the word "awestruck".

What about


haha, i like that too!

how can some one be spiritual yet under Webster it means

of, relating to, consisting of, or affecting the spirit :incorporeal em>spiritual needs>
a : of or relating to sacred matters em>spiritual songs>

b : ecclesiastical rather than lay or temporal em>spiritualauthority> <lords spiritual>
: concerned with religious values
: related or joined in spirit <our spiritual home> <his spiritualheir>
a : of or relating to supernatural beings or phenomena

b : of, relating to, or involving spiritualism


Agree.. the majority of definitions somehow are based on the supernatural or religion. That's why I feel there is a level of "pandering" to the religious to not appear to be TOO much of an atheist. Or to not appear as if you lack mystery or "awe" etc... It's not worth it to me. And is supportive of ideas i'm not interested in supporting.

Some people say that spirit means "breath" but who cares? Thats not what anyone knows it as...

Find a new word as suggested above.. "awestruck" or "awesome"... people will understand you more.

From wikipedia:

Spirituality is the concept of an ultimate or an alleged immaterial reality;[1] an inner path enabling a person to discover the essence of his/her being; or the "deepest values and meanings by which people live."[2] Spiritual practices, including meditation, prayer and contemplation, are intended to develop an individual's inner life. Spiritual experiences can include being connected to a larger reality, yielding a more comprehensive self; joining with other individuals or the human community; with nature or the cosmos; or with the divine realm.[3] Spirituality is often experienced as a source of inspiration or orientation in life.[4]

Now, I'm not going to argue that my source is better than yours. I'd probably lose! But I do choose this more liberal interpretation, for myself.

Calling oneself spiritual when one doesn't believe in spirit or spirits is a bit schizophrenic. Why not choose a less misleading word?

Look at it this way: would it make sense to describe yourself as "sexual" if you didn't believe in sex?

Ask Sam Harris. a bit schizophrenic...

How about "a tad spiritual"?

My next vacation will be in A.Hughman's mind.

I can't answer that - I've believed in spirits ever since I was old enough to buy them. Eighty-proof is my preference, but 151 rum is a nice change of pace.

I'll drink to that !


© 2020   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service