Originally posted by FMFcant say until its illustrated for me, which you somehow seem unable to do? Why is
Do you think things along a continuum are all essentially one in the same thing? Yes or no?
that? Is the concept so difficult and so profound an idea that you cannot illustrate it in
simple terms? Interesting that Einstein was able to illustrate the theory of special
relativity in simple terms yet the continuum seems much more troubling, oh well,
perhaps someone that understands it can illustrate it.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe concept of a continuum is very straight forward.It is you who is finding it "troubling". To be frank, I believe you are feigning this inability to understand and that your champing-at-the-bit-esque question "so you are saying they are essentially one and the same thing?" indicates that my very first post on page 1, under the OP, may have hit the nail right on the head. 😉
cant say until its illustrated for me, which you somehow seem unable to do? Why is
that? Is the concept so difficult and so profound an idea that you cannot illustrate it in
simple terms? Interesting that Einstein was able to illustrate the theory of special
relativity in simple terms yet the continuum seems much more troubling, oh well,
perhaps someone that understands it can illustrate it.
OK, perhaps robbie has got whatever it was from the other thread off his chest and his indignation has made him feel "validated".
I reckon spirituality and philosophy represent a kind of continuum. That's my take on it. Broadly speaking they occupy different parts of the continuum that represents the 'results', to date, of our common human endeavour to conceive of and process all abstract things that pertain to us: how we can relate to - or even perhaps alter - these abstractions; how we perceive and position ourselves; and how these abstract issues of our overlapping and interacting spirits affect the way in which we organize ourselves and relate to each other.
Philosophy and spirituality can sometimes appear diametric [spirituality draws heavily upon supernatural explanations for things, whereas large tracts of philosophy do not], they can overlap, they can be adjacent to each other, and, in practical terms, they are sometimes indistinguishable when they combine to offer us insight.
They both represent inquiry into nature of the human condition. That's my penny's worth for now. I'll be interested to see what others have to say. Good topic for an OP.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Light can be thought of as a continuum.
Every frequency of light is a different colour but adjacent frequencies are so close as to be
pretty much indistinguishable from one another.
However red and blue while both being on a continuum where two adjacent colours are
indistinguishable are certainly not the same thing.
Another example would be the left/right axis of political/economic ideology.
The far left and the far right are wholly different from one another but in between is a continuous
range of political opinion that slowly moves from one extreme through the centre to the other extreme.
Although how you can possibly fail to understand FMF's perfectly good and clear definition perhaps
these examples will clear things up for you.
I am not sure myself that I would classify philosophy and spirituality as being on a continuum...
but then I have no idea what the definition of spirituality is or even if there is one that can be agreed on
that I could use as a basis for deciding.
Spirituality seems to me to be one of those words tat people often use when they want to be vague and undefined
about what they mean so they can mean whatever they want without being pinned down.
Of course if any of you want to have a go at define spirituality so that we can know what it means then I might
be able to formulate an opinion on the subject.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIn philosophy, "spiritualism" is the doctrine that the spirit exists as distinct from matter, or that "spirit is the sole reality" (for example check the Oxford Pocket Dictionary of Current English/ 2009, originally published by Oxford University Press/ 2009). Therefore the basic philosophical product over here is "the power of the spirit" and "the quality or state of being spiritual" (Webster 1913). I will argue as regards to this specific definition of spirituality (the other definitions are either religious or theological or theosophical).
well then perhaps you had better explain what is, in clear terms that are readily
discernible, for as yet, you have not done so, or at least i cannot understand what you
purport to be saying, although i have asked for an explanation. I asked, what is the
difference between Philosophy and spirituality and you state that its a continuum, I try
...[text shortened]... like, Philosophy is similar in some
respects to spirituality but it diverges in certain ways?
Methinks the scientist builds his ideas based on the concept of synthesis, whilst the philosopher analyses abstract ideas. But in order to analyze them, the philosopher has to understand the nature of the problem in question. Using spiritualism the philosopher is not obliged to raise his mind at the sphere of the metaphysics but he constructs a specific symbol that represents the abstract reality of the nature that, for the time being, remains unconceivable for him. Therefore he needs not to "know"; this is the main idea behind the invention of, say, algebra: we name x the unknown, p the half of x and z the known. Now x is not unknown anymore because it can be expressed with z's terms -and then we can understand x.
So, in my opinion spiritualism is a tool that enables the philosopher to guide his mind inside the Invisible and the Unconceivable (and this is the reason why the process of thought evolved from the language and not the opposite)
😵
Originally posted by googlefudgethanks light seems a rather excellent illustration, I suppose sound must be another one.
Light can be thought of as a continuum.
Every frequency of light is a different colour but adjacent frequencies are so close as to be
pretty much indistinguishable from one another.
However red and blue while both being on a continuum where two adjacent colours are
indistinguishable are certainly not the same thing.
Another example would b ...[text shortened]... o that we can know what it means then I might
be able to formulate an opinion on the subject.
Originally posted by black beetleIts really too confusing for me dear beetle, the state or quality of being spiritual is fine,
In philosophy, "spiritualism" is the doctrine that the spirit exists as distinct from matter, or that "spirit is the sole reality" (for example check the Oxford Pocket Dictionary of Current English/ 2009, originally published by Oxford University Press/ 2009). Therefore the basic philosophical product over here is "the power of the spirit" and "the qual reason why the process of thought evolved from the language and not the opposite)
😵
but what does it really mean? It might be defined as 'sensitivity or attachment to
religious values', but this is certainly no good, for others like FMF, 'believe without
belonging,' or professing any religious affinity, for others spirituality is something that is
found deep within oneself. It is their way of loving, accepting and relating to the world
and people around them. Thus it appears to me that spirituality is the way or manner
in which we lead our life from the values we have come to discern as pertaining to the
spirit. Philosophy from what I have read also deals with ethics, morality, spirituality etc,
but it is wholly unconcerned with what one does with the results of ones examination of
these ideas and instead seeks solely to attempt to understand them.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by black beetleHowever there are also those who when they talk about being spiritual and spirituality are
In philosophy, "spiritualism" is the doctrine that the spirit exists as distinct from matter, or that "spirit is the sole reality" (for example check the Oxford Pocket Dictionary of Current English/ 2009, originally published by Oxford University Press/ 2009). Therefore the basic philosophical product over here is "the power of the spirit" and "the qual ...[text shortened]... reason why the process of thought evolved from the language and not the opposite)
😵
talking about things like 'oneness with nature' or 'inner contentment' ect. Which does not
necessarily suppose or require the existence of any spirit or life force at all.
Is that version of spirituality simply to be said to be wrong, or can we have a definition of
spirituality that includes it as well?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI have no desire to to stop or dissuade you from loving, accepting and relating to the world and people around you for the reasons you choose, robbie. What I find rather nonplussing is how you present your beliefs as an "absolute truth" and as if they render other people's loving, accepting and relating to the world and people around them, as somehow not "validated", not "certified", or somehow lacking in "merit", because they are not undertaken for exactly the same reasons you choose.
... spirituality is something that is found deep within oneself. It is their way of loving, accepting and relating to the world and people around them.
Originally posted by FMFIts not about me FMF, please try to refrain from reducing the thread to a bickering
I have no desire to to stop or dissuade you from loving, accepting and relating to the world and people around you for the reasons you choose, robbie. What I find rather nonplussing is how you present your beliefs as an "absolute truth" and as if they render other people's loving, accepting and relating to the world and people around them, as somehow not "valida ...[text shortened]... ng in "merit", because they are not undertaken for exactly the same reasons you choose.
rivalry.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou read that philosophy is wholly unconcerned with what one does [having reached an understanding of something]? Did you read this in a JW publication or in books about philosophy?
Philosophy from what I have read also deals with ethics, morality, spirituality etc, but it is wholly unconcerned with what one does with the results of ones examination of these ideas and instead seeks solely to attempt to understand them.
Originally posted by FMFI read it elsewhere in fact. I cannot remember where but it wasn't in one of our
You read that philosophy is wholly unconcerned with what one does [having reached an understanding of something]? Did you read this in a JW publication or in books about philosophy?
publications, the Bible in fact terms philosophy an empty deception among the
elementary things of the world, would you like me to show you where?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWell I don't agree, and "where" it says that it's "an empty deception" is not really pertinent.
I read it elsewhere in fact. I cannot remember where but it wasn't in one of our
publications, the Bible in fact terms philosophy an empty deception among the
elementary things of the world, would you like me to show you where?