# What is this "Spirituality" you Earthmen speak of? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 27, 2005, 12:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-this-spirituality-you-earthmen-speak-of/310029 "2005-06-27T12:51:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 10:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-this-spirituality-you-earthmen-speak-of/310029/81 "2005-06-29T10:45:43Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > Correct. Logic games are fine and dandy until I actually have to drive a couple of nails into a board. At that time I reach for my real hammer that, after many empirical demonstrations, has proven to be a very effective tool for such a job. As a man who understands the concept of the right tool for the right job, you will understand that the same is true of sources of knowledge. You will understand that an empirical system is worthless for that which cannot be seen — for example, proving that 1 + 1 = 2. You will understand that a deductive logic system is required for that task. Scientific experiments are fine and dandy, but when you must find the measurement of a circle’s circumference, knowing its diameter, a pencil beats a tape measure any day. So long as you are driving nails, a hammer is a fine tool. But when entropy has claimed your body — your tool is worthless to you. Now, you will say that once your energy capable of doing work is spent, you are finished as an entity. But I would say that that is only because you value that which dies. ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 11:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-this-spirituality-you-earthmen-speak-of/310029/82 "2005-06-29T11:39:54Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > You will understand that an empirical system is worthless for that which cannot be seen — for example, proving that 1 + 1 = 2. You will understand that a deductive logic system is required for that task. Scientific experiments are fine and dandy, but when you must find the measurement of a circle’s circumference, knowing its diameter, a pencil beats a tape measure any day. And the pencil is as useful a tool as the hammer at times. Yet, the ability to use the pencil had to come from observations of real world. I can prove that 1+1=2. Put one apple on the table then add another one. When I count them the result should be two apples. I can prove that ~3.14 x diameter = the circumference by using a tape measure. How accurate I am depends on the accuracy of the tools used to do the measuring. How accurate I have to be depends on the task I am working on. This sort of mathematics is based upon observation, is it not? Am I correct in saying that more advanced mathematics builds upon what is observable and extrapolates that to what is not observable? At that point a theory is created and someone figures out a way to test that what the mathematical theory predicts is actually demonstratable? > [@](#): > > Now, you will say that once your energy capable of doing work is spent, you are finished as an entity. But I would say that that is only because you value that which dies. And we are back to what I can see and what you can prove. It is irrelevant what happens afterwards as I can in no way measure or calculate the end result of something unless I have the ability to observe at least the basic way in which that something works. eg, I can’t calculate the circumference of a circle until I get past 1+1=2. Now I can imagine many things that could occur after I am worn out, but that is my imagination and what I imagine is probably as valid as what anyone else has to say about the matter including mainstream religions and spiritual types alike. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 11:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-this-spirituality-you-earthmen-speak-of/310029/83 "2005-06-29T11:45:52Z")
> [@Eve](#): > > Whu-_huh?_ We choose to be seperate from God and each other , and not share the love that is available to us, until, we begin to make choices that draw us closer to God and each other. Better? 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 12:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-this-spirituality-you-earthmen-speak-of/310029/84 "2005-06-29T12:22:15Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > If someone proclaims that they are Christian I assume they share that common belief with others who make the same proclamation. That may vary based upon what I stated earlier. Some may well be flakes, bigots, nice people, etc. Yet there is still that core connection. Those who I have known and who have claimed to be spiritual have tended strongly towards the flake category. None have clearly defined what they meant by being spiritual, but what was common among them was a flake like quality. So, you are correct it is only those who have claimed to be spiritual who seem to be flakes in my estimation, there may be many who consider themselves spiritual and I don’t know it…But then there are people I consider flakes without knowing if they consider themselves to be spiritual. I wonder if it is the claiming to be spiritual that makes one a flake (at least from my experience)? I find myself more concerned about what type of person they are. Trustworthy, considerate, humorous, etc. Just the info “christian” doesn’t reveal any important details to me. Neither does just the spiritual label. I know plenty of people who are spiritual who are not flakes. The fact that they{we} don’t have a common doctrine or dogma is an indication that we hold the qualities of an individual is higher esteem than the details of their spiritual beliefs. Our core connection may be as broad as a belief as a spiritual connection that runs through all creation. It may not be as specific as other doctrines but it is just as valid. ---
**Author:** ![Eve](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Eve](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eve)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 1:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-this-spirituality-you-earthmen-speak-of/310029/85 "2005-06-29T13:05:32Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > . . . the letter of the law is but a pale shadow of the spirit of the law. I think that physicality is like the letter of the law, and spirituality is like the spirit of the law. And I think that the same statement applies. But what of us happy outlaws? Seems to me from this thread this is what I’m hearing: Spiritual people: “Spirituality rules the universe, it connects you with greater forces, it calms you and gives you purpose.” Nonspiritual people: “But we’re perfectly happy and content and fulfilled without believing in any of that.” Am I on the right track? ---
**Author:** ![panache45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/panache45/32/64_2.png) [@panache45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panache45)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 1:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-this-spirituality-you-earthmen-speak-of/310029/86 "2005-06-29T13:15:27Z")
> [@lekatt](#): > > Spiritual Love is the most powerful force in existence, it is the genses of all creation, it contains all knowledge, and all wisdom. We need only to acceot its gift of love to understand who we are. We are of it, and within it. It is this, our greatness, that we cannot face. Our fears hold us in the illusions of materialism. Well now you’ve gone and blown out the circuits of my bs-o-meter. ---
**Author:** ![Kalhoun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3bc359/32.png) [@Kalhoun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kalhoun)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-this-spirituality-you-earthmen-speak-of/310029/87 "2005-06-29T13:43:36Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > We choose to be seperate from God and each other , and not share the love that is available to us, until, we begin to make choices that draw us closer to God and each other. Better? 🙂 Not for me, it isn’t. I don’t see where the “choice” comes in. If he’s there, and he loves us…we would all know it. We wouldn’t question his existence anymore than we would question the existence of our own bodies. You may choose to _believe_ something is there, whether conventional logic and understanding disagrees or not. But I can’t _choose_ to ignore something that isn’t there in the first place. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-this-spirituality-you-earthmen-speak-of/310029/88 "2005-06-29T14:35:36Z")
> [@Kalhoun](#): > > Not for me, it isn’t. I don’t see where the “choice” comes in. **If he’s there, and he loves us…we would all know it.** We wouldn’t question his existence anymore than we would question the existence of our own bodies. I don’t understand the logic in this. How do you assume that if God were real we would all know it? Someone tells you God is real and you say “I refuse to believe that until I see evidence that is acceptable to me” Thats your choice. > [@](#): > > You may choose to _believe_ something is there, whether conventional logic and understanding disagrees or not. But I can’t _choose_ to ignore something that isn’t there in the first place. Thats true, but simply declaring that something isn’t there doesn’t make it a truthful statement does it? Com’on you knew that all along didn’t ya? ---
**Author:** ![Kalhoun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3bc359/32.png) [@Kalhoun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kalhoun)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-this-spirituality-you-earthmen-speak-of/310029/89 "2005-06-29T14:44:51Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > I don’t understand the logic in this. How do you assume that if God were real we would all know it? Someone tells you God is real and you say “I refuse to believe that until I see evidence that is acceptable to me” Thats your choice. Simply put, there’s no reason for someone or something to love me and NOT let me know it. Why must this “love” be hidden in mystery? Why wouldn’t a god prove himself to the object of his affection? There’d be more in it for _him!_ > [@](#): > > Thats true, but simply declaring that something isn’t there doesn’t make it a truthful statement does it? Com’on you knew that all along didn’t ya? All I’m saying is that I don’t need to prove a negative. If and when a higher power makes itself known universally, I’ll most certainly acknowledge it. Until that time, I see no reason to behave as if it exists when nobody really knows that it does. ---
**Author:** ![Eve](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Eve](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eve)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-this-spirituality-you-earthmen-speak-of/310029/90 "2005-06-29T14:48:25Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > . . . simply declaring that something isn’t there doesn’t make it a truthful statement does it? . . . and simply declaring that something _is_ there doesn’t make it a truthful statement, does it? ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-this-spirituality-you-earthmen-speak-of/310029/91 "2005-06-29T17:14:53Z")
> [@Kalhoun](#): > > Simply put, there’s no reason for someone or something to love me and NOT let me know it. Why must this “love” be hidden in mystery? Why wouldn’t a god prove himself to the object of his affection? There’d be more in it for _him!_ How do you figure that? Why would a being who is the source of all love need to prove it to anyone. Since we’re speaking of a supposed omniscient and omnipotent being I can hardly see how there can be “more” in it for him. Why is anything hidden or a mystery? Our knowledge and understanding is incomplete. > [@](#): > > All I’m saying is that I don’t need to prove a negative. If and when a higher power makes itself known universally, I’ll most certainly acknowledge it. Until that time, I see no reason to behave as if it exists when nobody really knows that it does. That is indeed your choice. It has nothing to do with proving a negative. It’s just decideing what you believe and why. Have at it. I’m glad not everybody waits for someone else to prove something before they entertain the idea. We need the visionaries as much as we need those who call themselves realistic and practical. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-this-spirituality-you-earthmen-speak-of/310029/92 "2005-06-29T17:18:37Z")
> [@Eve](#): > > . . . and simply declaring that something _is_ there doesn’t make it a truthful statement, does it? you are correct. I never claimed otherwise. We are free to choose what we believe for our own reasons. That was the point of my response. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-this-spirituality-you-earthmen-speak-of/310029/93 "2005-06-29T17:35:42Z")
> [@Eve](#): > > But what of us happy outlaws? Seems to me from this thread this is what I’m hearing: > > Spiritual people: “Spirituality rules the universe, it connects you with greater forces, it calms you and gives you purpose.” > > Nonspiritual people: “But we’re perfectly happy and content and fulfilled without believing in any of that.” > > Am I on the right track? Yes, absolutely. Morality is not about ethics, but aesthetics. God’s gift to every person is that which the person values. You will have the desires of your heart because, as Jesus teaches, where your treasure is, there your heart is also. Hell is not a punishment; it is a reward. ---
**Author:** ![Anne\_Neville](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Anne\_Neville](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Anne_Neville)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-this-spirituality-you-earthmen-speak-of/310029/94 "2005-06-29T17:45:10Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > to be fair, the rare proselytizer is a good sincere and passionate person who is moved to share their vision of the truth. Even if I don’t agree I find it hard to be angry. As long as they’ll stop trying to convert me the first time I ask them to, and don’t insult me because of my religious beliefs or lack thereof, I don’t have a problem with them either. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-this-spirituality-you-earthmen-speak-of/310029/95 "2005-06-29T17:48:02Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > I can prove that 1+1=2. Put one apple on the table then add another one. When I count them the result should be two apples. No, sorry. All you proved was that, _in that particular insta_nce, you counted two apples. You did not prove that,\* upon the next try\*, you will count the same number. You have not shown that there is a general analytic rule that we can always use to be assured of the same answer. > [@](#): > > Am I correct in saying that more advanced mathematics builds upon what is observable and extrapolates that to what is not observable? At that point a theory is created and someone figures out a way to test that what the mathematical theory predicts is actually demonstratable? Keep in mind that scientific tests cannot determine truth, but only falsity. Thus, a theory is identified as scientific if and only if it is falsifiable. Otherwise, once a theory has been tested, there would be no point in continuing to examine it — you will have arrived at the truth. There is controversy over whether mathematical statements are synthetic or analytic. It is reasonable to argue it either way. But what is not controversial is whether mathematical _rules_ are analytic. They are. > [@](#): > > And we are back to what I can see and what you can prove. It is irrelevant what happens afterwards as I can in no way measure or calculate the end result of something unless I have the ability to observe at least the basic way in which that something works. eg, I can’t calculate the circumference of a circle until I get past 1+1=2. Again, you value things that you can see — like measurements. So your viewpoints are to be expected. But given the brain’s proclivity for lateral inhibition, it turns out that what you really are trusting is what you _don’t_ see. > [@](#): > > Now I can imagine many things that could occur after I am worn out, but that is my imagination and what I imagine is probably as valid as what anyone else has to say about the matter including mainstream religions and spiritual types alike. Some men can see what others can only imagine. ---
**Author:** ![Kalhoun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3bc359/32.png) [@Kalhoun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kalhoun)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-this-spirituality-you-earthmen-speak-of/310029/96 "2005-06-29T18:07:30Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > How do you figure that? Why would a being who is the source of all love need to prove it to anyone. Since we’re speaking of a supposed omniscient and omnipotent being I can hardly see how there can be “more” in it for him. Well, for starters, letting mere mortals know that there was someone in the drivers seat through all of eternity would be the fair and right and kind thing to do. I love my husband. I know I will be losing my job in a few months. I let him know ahead of time because sneaky, disingenuous behavior is generally frowned upon in a loving relationship. > [@](#): > > Why is anything hidden or a mystery? Our knowledge and understanding is incomplete. That’s right. Which is to say that our knowledge of the existence of a god is incomplete. Until I see evidence to the contrary, I’ll have to continue to believe that anything is possible, but not necessarily probable. > [@](#): > > That is indeed your choice. It has nothing to do with proving a negative. It’s just decideing what you believe and why. Have at it. > I’m glad not everybody waits for someone else to prove something before they entertain the idea. We need the visionaries as much as we need those who call themselves realistic and practical. I agree about the need for visionaries. In fact, they’re some of my favorite people. I don’t agree that believers in a higher power necessarily fall into that category…in fact, I believe most fall short. But that’s what makes the world go 'round, right? ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-this-spirituality-you-earthmen-speak-of/310029/97 "2005-06-29T18:11:43Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Yes, absolutely. Morality is not about ethics, but aesthetics. God’s gift to every person is that which the person values. You will have the desires of your heart because, as Jesus teaches, where your treasure is, there your heart is also.\*\* Hell is not a punishment; it is a reward\*\*. I was with you up to the sentance I bolded. Our choices conscious and unconscious have consequences and so , we get what we choose, makes some sense. Are unpleasent consequences a reward or simply a natural result? ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-this-spirituality-you-earthmen-speak-of/310029/98 "2005-06-29T18:21:16Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > I was with you up to the sentance I bolded. Our choices conscious and unconscious have consequences and so , we get what we choose, makes some sense. Are unpleasent consequences a reward or simply a natural result? We pursue what we treasure, and we get what we pursue. My wife would love nothing more than an endless supply of popcorn shrimp, while I would consider that to be the foulest possible fate. It is ironic that some Christians will find themselves in the place of the prodigal son’s brother, mumbling and grumbling while people like Eve enjoy for eternity what she has always treasured. I tell you that God’s love for her is so great that He is willing to let her go, rather than impose Himself on her, since she has no interest in Him. And He wishes her nothing but the happiness that will be hers. ---
**Author:** ![Hoodoo\_Ulove](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/58956e/32.png) [@Hoodoo\_Ulove](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hoodoo_Ulove)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-this-spirituality-you-earthmen-speak-of/310029/99 "2005-06-29T18:35:15Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > We pursue what we treasure, and we get what we pursue. Doesn’t the quarry outrun us, sometimes? ---
**Author:** ![ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9bcb4/32.png) [@ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2005, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-this-spirituality-you-earthmen-speak-of/310029/100 "2005-06-29T18:35:53Z")
> [@Eve](#): > > Spiritual people: “Spirituality rules the universe, it connects you with greater forces, it calms you and gives you purpose.” I feel connected, but not necessarily to a deity or a “greater force”. I feel connected to more of the physical world than just myself, more than just my family, more than just my friends, more than just my species, more than just other living things. I’m not “calmed” by my perspective. If anything it creates more questions than it answers. Questions that cannot currently be answered empirically. Do any of the unique byproducts of the chemical reactions within our physical selves that make us alive, aware, or self-aware (e. g. perceptions, instincts, behaviors, memories, emotions, preferences, personalities) endure after death? Are they distributed and recycled into other living beings as our physical selves are? My hypothesis at this point is yes, and that is based on applying what is empirically observed with our physical selves and applying the same principles to our selves that are not as clearly defined as “physical”. I don’t feel my existence has more purpose or justification when viewed through my “connected” perspective. It is the best hypothesis I can come up with based on my scientific knowledge and the knowledge of myself in an attempt to reconcile both. I don’t think trying to reconcile the two requires a motivation of seeking purpose or justification. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-this-spirituality-you-earthmen-speak-of/310029.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-this-spirituality-you-earthmen-speak-of/310029.md?page=6)