is it ok to call oneself Spiritual when they don't believe in Spirits?
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.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by MikeLong on -
Well Sam Harris has an opinion, but, in my opinion, he's using the word "spiritual" in a sense he would like it to have - not in its generally-accepted sense.
Sure, words change their meanings constantly. Perhaps in a decade or two Sam Harris won't come under the same amount of fire for his (currently incorrect) definition of the word.
-
Permalink Reply by MikeLong on
-
archaeopteryx:
Ok I hit the link called "> Reply" directly under your post, I created a reply (which you'll find somewhere), and then I clicked "Add Reply". My post is now being displayed as if it were a top-level post - a reply directly to the originating post. Further my post is not displayed with the indent symbol (the down/right arrow) preceding it. What am I not understanding? Please and thank you.
-
Permalink Reply by Pope OoO (Out of Order) on -
Did you refresh the page, yet?
-
Permalink Reply by archaeopteryx on -
Are you saying, Mike, that you posted it to my comment that began,"Bingo"? If not, which one? I want to see where your comment landed.
Sometimes - let's say your comment is the last one on a page, and I reply to your comment - if the page is full, my comment may appear below yours, but when the page is refreshed, or you leave the page and return (which automatically refreshes it), my comment will be found, not beneath yours, because that page was full, but at the top of the next page.
What browser are you using? Try changing browsers and see if it still happens.
If you KNOW you're doing everything right, and it still continues, go to the "Contact Us" link on the bottom of every page, and get a message off to Morgan Matthew.
Sorry I took so long to get back to you, but 7 hours ago, I was kinda sleeping --
-
Permalink Reply by MikeLong on
-
OK. Your post which starts "Are you saying..." is displayed with a down/right arrow indicating that it is in reply to some other post - mine, I assume. At the bottom of that post there is a "> Reply" link which I clicked. The system then displayed this page (page 8) of this thread with the original post at the beginning of the page followed by a "> Reply to This" link followed by the white text box into which I am now typing. I would have expected this box to appear immediately below your post, to which I am (supposedly) replying.
"Are you saying, Mike, that you posted it to my comment that began,"Bingo"? "
Yes!
"What browser are you using?"
I'm using Chrome.
"Sorry I took so long to get back to you, but 7 hours ago, I was kinda sleeping "
I'm on the other side of the world so I'm used to next-day interactions.
Thanks for your help, I'll put together a message for Morgan.
-
Permalink Reply by archaeopteryx on
-
Well, Mike, your post is directly beneath mine, as you anticipated. Could I make one other suggestion before you go further? Could I suggest you download FireFox and try it for a bit - I have no experience with Chrome, but I use FireFox, and have had no trouble. Try is, as an experiment --
You probably have some good things to say, but as it is, you're using up all your time and energy fighting this posting problem, which seems such a waste. I hope you get it resolved. If there's anything else I can do (not that I've really DONE anything), let me know.
-
Permalink Reply by George Gordner on -
I am not against the word soul, just to me as an atheist is has a different meaning. My soul is my character, that existential core that defines who and what I am, the depth of my being and what separates me from you.
I can't take it with my when I die.
Something like that
-
Permalink Reply by James Cox on -
"monarchy"
The system of thought contains the trappings of this, but 'God' will never be at the head of the UN, or point 'his' finger at Obama and say 'zott!' with the revolutionary result. Humans can use the claim of 'speeking for god' as a marketing ploy to obtain or hold power. This 'tool' of state craft has been used several times in history, many times by invading generals, sadly my historical references(from memory) excape me at this moment.
-
Permalink Reply by archaeopteryx on
-
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers, as useful."
-- Seneca --
-
Permalink Reply by George Gordner on
-
I totally understand what the young man is saying in the video. My "spirituality" if you can call it that has nothing to do with believing in a 'soul" or "spirit". It has to do with the beauty and awe in the universe and just how amazing our brains are to even notice. There is beauty in the simple and the complex. Love has a wonderful meaning to me, but love is not god, A god or gods that do not exist cannot love anyone. Only people can do that
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- …
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
What's new today
Events
Forum
America - "Love It or Leave It"
Started by Ed in Small Talk. Last reply by MikeLong 25 minutes ago. 32 Replies 0 Likes
Blog Posts
The Republicans accelerate their downward spiral
Posted by Unseen on June 19, 2013 at 1:26pm 9 Comments 0 Likes
Videos
Services we love
Check out our new mobile/tablet version of Think Atheist! www.ThinkAtheist.com/m
© 2013 Created by Morgan Matthew.
