12 Oct '20 12:38>
@ghost-of-a-duke saidIs “trifling fingerprints” still yours?
You've said 'appertains' at least 5 times now. Is that your new word of the month?
@ghost-of-a-duke saidIs “trifling fingerprints” still yours?
You've said 'appertains' at least 5 times now. Is that your new word of the month?
@divegeester saidOur metaphysical dimension is rooted in our faculties and capacities and need not be supernatural in any way.
Spirituality appertains to the metaphysical elements of the human condition which are of the spirit, the soul of a person. If one does not accept that a human being has a spirit, a soul an actual part of them which transcends the temporal then human beings by definition cannot be “spiritual”.
@fmf saidWithout the supernatural spirit then surely everything you have just described, as fine sounding as it is, is merely a function of the complex of neurones which make up the various interconnected dynamics of brain function.
Our metaphysical dimension is rooted in our faculties and capacities and need not be supernatural in any way.
Our each and every "soul" is that personhood which is founded on exclusive access to our each and every narrative, in harness with the unique moral compass that each of has, which is interwoven with that narrative, and which guides us as we continue the narrative int ...[text shortened]... onder many [most] people think that it's created by a deity and that it's supernatural in substance.
@divegeester saidYes. Brain function. And the unique narrative and moral compass this brain function affords us gives us an identity which is the same thing, to my way of thinking, as what theists are referring to when they talk about our "souls". Except, they think it's of supernatural origin while I think it of metaphysical origin.
Without the supernatural spirit then surely everything you have just described, as fine sounding as it is, is merely a function of the complex of neurones which make up the various interconnected dynamics of brain function.
@divegeester saidSo you can positively deny the existence of souls and still discuss the spiritual aspect of existence without being illogical.
Absolutely not, as I explained in an earlier post.
@kevcvs57 saidThat’s a non sequitur Kev. Also it’s a false dichotomy.
So you can positively deny the existence of souls and still discuss the spiritual aspect of existence without being illogical.
@fmf saidI don’t disagree with anything you’ve written here. In fact I would say that from the atheists POV “spirituality” and “a (certain) way of thinking” are indeed exactly the same thing. In fact I think that is what my point has been in this discourse.
Yes. Brain function. And the unique narrative and moral compass this brain function affords us gives us an identity which is the same thing, to my way of thinking, as what theists are referring to when they talk about our "souls". Except, they think it's of supernatural origin while I think it of metaphysical origin.
I find no credible reason to believe any of the "revealed" Gods are involved.
@moonbus saidHah! Another "soothing irrationality"!
Buddhism is a form of spirituality which does not require belief in, or presuppose the existence of, supernatural entities.
@bigdoggproblem saidFor sooth, some people want not soothing.
Hah! Another "soothing irrationality"!
Then again, who are theists to talk in this respect!
@divegeester saidIt’s neither but that’s irrelevant anyway dive. I’m just tying to get clarification on who can and cannot discuss ‘spirituality” whilst maintaining the internal logic of their philosophy.
That’s a non sequitur Kev. Also it’s a false dichotomy.
@kevcvs57 saidIt’s both Kev. Your comment non sequentiality and non logically followed in reply to mine, and in doing so it presented me with a false dichotomy.
It’s neither but that’s irrelevant anyway dive.
@kevcvs57 saidAtheists keep bringing theism into into this discourse, I don’t.
I think the actual problem is that this forums title and brief rubric is too restrictive if we use the dictionary definitions of ‘spirituality’. It almost precludes the question regarding the nature of reality and sets up a two dimensional bun fight between theists and atheists along with a good dose of trench warfare between the Christians of different interpretational dog ...[text shortened]... which is really in the spirit of a genuine search for truths concerning the nature of existence IMO.
@moonbus saidNo one so far has mentioned “supernatural entities”.
Buddhism is a form of spirituality which does not require belief in, or presuppose the existence of, supernatural entities.
@bigdoggproblem saidMore appeals to theism...
Hah! Another "soothing irrationality"!
Then again, who are theists to talk in this respect!