1. Joined
    29 Dec '08
    Moves
    6788
    09 Mar '11 20:16
    Is there a place in the human mind for an approach and view toward life that is both spiritual and existential? Or are there incompatibilities? If there are, what do you think they are? Are they due to differences between things that are not essential to either approach?
  2. Standard memberua41
    Sharp Edge
    Dulling my blade
    Joined
    11 Dec '09
    Moves
    14434
    09 Mar '11 20:291 edit
    Good thoughts, got my brain going

    I've often viewed my existentialist views as my spirituality. What I find to be meaningful and purposeful, that fulfills my spirituality needs/requirements. I think if there incompatible meshes of the two, its if the spiritual aspect has been dogmatized without personal scrutiny and reflection (e.g. just a follower of a religion without giving a second thought or open mind to other ideals).

    People often find meaning, or justification in their spirituality. I mean, morality, ways of life etc., but it does not necessarily entail that they came to it from contexts outside their own. I think as long as any person involved with spirituality (whether that's just general progressing in knowledge, or particularly set on one path) and recognize or uphold an ideal that it's all rather subjective and on a person to person basis, spirituality could fulfill an existential definition.
  3. Donationrwingett
    Ming the Merciless
    Royal Oak, MI
    Joined
    09 Sep '01
    Moves
    26187
    09 Mar '11 21:55
    Originally posted by JS357
    Is there a place in the human mind for an approach and view toward life that is both spiritual and existential? Or are there incompatibilities? If there are, what do you think they are? Are they due to differences between things that are not essential to either approach?
    Søren Kierkegaard.
  4. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    10 Mar '11 01:101 edit
    Originally posted by JS357
    Is there a place in the human mind for an approach and view toward life that is both spiritual and existential? Or are there incompatibilities? If there are, what do you think they are? Are they due to differences between things that are not essential to either approach?
    I think that Curly in the movie "City Slickers" said it best. When asked what life was all about his response, "One thing". When asked what that one thing was he responded, "That's what you have to figure out". Whether we realize it or not we all are forced to answer the same question and end up choosing that one thing. All I can say is, choose wisely. 😉
  5. Standard memberkaroly aczel
    the Devil himself
    Brisbane,QLD
    Joined
    11 Apr '09
    Moves
    91531
    10 Mar '11 03:35
    Kafka's "Metamophosis" is a great read, for a short story, and captures the existential dillema in a very unique way,imo
  6. St. Peter's
    Joined
    06 Dec '10
    Moves
    11308
    10 Mar '11 15:51
    Originally posted by rwingett
    Søren Kierkegaard.
    love his work, though like most philosphers, the work is incomplete. Interestingly he would publish articles under a psuedonym and then proceed to openly criticize his own work in a sort of "public debate".

    Perhaps oneday we will see a philospher emerge with a "string theory" of sorts that unify many or most of the known philisophical principles, combining the fromal and material, the utilitarian and the metaphysical, etc
  7. Standard memberrvsakhadeo
    rvsakhadeo
    India
    Joined
    19 Feb '09
    Moves
    36544
    10 Mar '11 16:47
    Originally posted by JS357
    Is there a place in the human mind for an approach and view toward life that is both spiritual and existential? Or are there incompatibilities? If there are, what do you think they are? Are they due to differences between things that are not essential to either approach?
    Please do define what is an existential view of Life. Is it the following point/points:- a)" Life has no meaning" view ? b) We humans( and other living beings) are a chance byproduct of chemical and physical reactions on a lifeless planet tossed in a universe of unknown dimensions,probably the only living beings ?c)" Nothing matters,nobody knows the Truth " view?
    I recall hazily that Jean Paul Sartre was an exponent of this philosophy but had a lifelong affair with that lady who authored "the second sex"-aha I recall her name- Simone Signoret ! So old Sartre did partake of the good things in Life, posing as a hater of Life ?
    Spiritual fatigue sometimes leads a man to think that" not a thing matters,everything is a hoax,life is meaningless" but that is only a temporary phase in the spiritual search that one should undertake.
  8. Joined
    29 Dec '08
    Moves
    6788
    10 Mar '11 17:04
    Originally posted by rvsakhadeo
    Please do define what is an existential view of Life. Is it the following point/points:- a)" Life has no meaning" view ? b) We humans( and other living beings) are a chance byproduct of chemical and physical reactions on a lifeless planet tossed in a universe of unknown dimensions,probably the only living beings ?c)" Nothing matters,nobody knows the Tru ...[text shortened]... s" but that is only a temporary phase in the spiritual search that one should undertake.
    It was Simone de Beauvoir. I suggest http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/existentialism/
    particularly the 3rd and 4th paragraph.
  9. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    10 Mar '11 17:15
    Originally posted by rvsakhadeo
    Please do define what is an existential view of Life. Is it the following point/points:- a)" Life has no meaning" view ? b) We humans( and other living beings) are a chance byproduct of chemical and physical reactions on a lifeless planet tossed in a universe of unknown dimensions,probably the only living beings ?c)" Nothing matters,nobody knows the Tru ...[text shortened]... s" but that is only a temporary phase in the spiritual search that one should undertake.
    In short, with such a worldview spirituality is simply trying to give meaning to that which has none. Spirituality is then reduced to creating an illusion so as to help one from going mad.
  10. Standard memberDasa
    Dasa
    Account suspended
    Joined
    20 May '10
    Moves
    8042
    10 Mar '11 17:39
    Originally posted by JS357
    Is there a place in the human mind for an approach and view toward life that is both spiritual and existential? Or are there incompatibilities? If there are, what do you think they are? Are they due to differences between things that are not essential to either approach?
    It is impossible to discuss existentialism without discussing spirituality......for spirituality is what we are.

    The word spirituality comes from spirit.....and spirit is the living force within the material body.

    The spirit is you.

    The body is not you.

    The mind is not you.

    Material apparatus cannot detect spirit.....therefore the cheating scientist will say that spirit does not exist.

    Thats not even scientific......to say we cannot see spirit so it does not exist.

    Spirit is detected by the purified mind and intelligence.

    The conditioned mind and intelligence cannot detect spirit.

    There is a process to purify the mind and intelligence, but the cheating scientist will not apply this process to themselves, and then claim they do not detect spirit......this is why they are cheaters and rascals.
  11. Joined
    24 Apr '05
    Moves
    3061
    10 Mar '11 17:43
    Originally posted by whodey
    In short, with such a worldview spirituality is simply trying to give meaning to that which has none. Spirituality is then reduced to creating an illusion so as to help one from going mad.
    🙄

    You're just taking a page from the epiphinehas playbook (see Thread 136838). Your claim is no less inane this his entire argument.
  12. Standard memberDasa
    Dasa
    Account suspended
    Joined
    20 May '10
    Moves
    8042
    10 Mar '11 17:55
    Originally posted by LemonJello
    🙄

    You're just taking a page from the epiphinehas playbook (see Thread 136838). Your claim is no less inane this his entire argument.
    What is insane is.........that you deny what I say.
  13. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    10 Mar '11 21:04
    Originally posted by LemonJello
    🙄

    You're just taking a page from the epiphinehas playbook (see Thread 136838). Your claim is no less inane this his entire argument.
    All I am saying is that we assign meaning to things. Without assigning meaning to things they have no meaning, rather, they simply are what they are. Facts by themselves have no meaning. It is only when we interpret them to have meaning that it is assigned value. For example, 2+2=4. Great, but what do I care? It only matters if I can apply that to my own life and for my own benefit to try and better understand the world. Otherwise, what do I care?
  14. Joined
    24 Apr '05
    Moves
    3061
    10 Mar '11 22:251 edit
    Originally posted by whodey
    All I am saying is that we assign meaning to things. Without assigning meaning to things they have no meaning, rather, they simply are what they are. Facts by themselves have no meaning. It is only when we interpret them to have meaning that it is assigned value. For example, 2+2=4. Great, but what do I care? It only matters if I can apply that to my ow ...[text shortened]... life and for my own benefit to try and better understand the world. Otherwise, what do I care?
    All I am saying is that we assign meaning to things.

    No, that is not all you were saying. I like the way you cannot even keep track of your own claims. To jog your memory, what you stated was

    In short, with such a worldview spirituality is simply trying to give meaning to that which has none. Spirituality is then reduced to creating an illusion so as to help one from going mad.

    Are you honestly claiming that this just reduces down to the claim that "we assign meaning to things"? Please at least own up to the fact that this was a jab at meaning that is entertained within a particular worldview that just happens to differ from yours.

    Meaning, as you correctly point out, has inherent subjective dimension. And, I would further add that meaning, by its nature has real substance (again, to someone that is).
  15. Joined
    27 Sep '06
    Moves
    9651
    10 Mar '11 23:19
    Originally posted by JS357
    Is there a place in the human mind for an approach and view toward life that is both spiritual and existential? Or are there incompatibilities? If there are, what do you think they are? Are they due to differences between things that are not essential to either approach?
    "Is there a place in the human mind for an approach and view toward life that is both spiritual and existential?"

    No. At least I don't think so.


    "Or are there incompatibilities?"

    Does existence precede essence? Can we dismiss the cause of our existence and focus merely on existence?


    "If there are, what do you think they are?"

    Man and all that he is was first formed in the mind of God. Our existence, and all that we are, isn't based solely on the material. In fact, the material is a manifestation of the spiritual. Existentialism, as a philosophical system of belief, is primarily concerned with 'how' to live without consideration for the cause of life. By the disregard for the cause of life one is essentially a void searching for meaning in the existence of the material.


    "Are they due to differences between things that are not essential to either approach?"

    No. The differences are due to what becomes ones' focus when one seeks to discover the truth about ones' existence. Ironically, existentialism's' focus is on ones' own pursuit of meaning and purpose by self realisation, while spirituality, if the truth be known, is focused on the infinite Creator as the source of all knowledge and truth.


    Kierkegaard, credited as the 'father of existentialism', is said to have been a Christian, but believed it wasn't possible to know and understand the Christ as the incarnation of God. I think existential thought and spiritual truth are at variance with each other in that the one believes spiritual truth cannot be known and therefore not useful for living, while the other is at the heart of existence altogether, without which life is just a puddle of mud one falls into by mere chance, and ends with no hope of redemption.
Back to Top