Spiritual versus Religious
-
- Posts: 54
- Joined: August 4th, 2013, 1:14 pm
Spiritual versus Religious
“...You are a child of the universe, no less than the trees and the stars...”
It is a feeling of awe and reverence which may be termed “spiritual”. It is independent of any anthropomorphism which is a key factor of religion.
Anthropomorphism -
an interpretation of what is not human or personal in terms of human or personal characteristics.
(Merriam Webster Dictionary)
Religion, based on some belief or dogma, is a social artifact or institution.
Institutions provide structure and a sense of meaning in human social existence.
Some other examples of institutions are the educational system and the legal system.
Religion may help to provide psychological security by helping some to deal with the uncertainties of daily life and the event of death – something that awaits each one of us.
Just as a child may feel comforted and secure in the caring provided by its parents or significant others, so too, in later life, many seek a similar relationship with a “supernatural entity” as espoused by religion.
Anthropomorphism is a key factor in the difference between being spiritual versus being religious.
- Frost
- Posts: 511
- Joined: January 20th, 2018, 2:44 pm
Re: Spiritual versus Religious
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 15148
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Spiritual versus Religious
I agree. I see secular spirituality as just just paying attention to reality closely enough to have an emotional reaction to our existential situation - which is completely mind-bending when you really stop to think about it.Metathought wrote: ↑January 28th, 2018, 9:40 pmAnthropomorphism is a key factor in the difference between being spiritual versus being religious.
Of course, the only things that are like humans are humans themselves and, to some extent, other intelligent animals and emerging AI.
I have long felt that the Sun and Earth worship of indigenous people and some ancient civilisations, when stripped of their odd side beliefs, was logical. The Earth and Sun are basically everything to us, more worthy of worship (if one is so inclined) than anything else I can think of.
Anthropomorphisation, of course, is ancient thinking, that was birthed before it was realised that humanity and its mentalities were not the pinnacles of being but more likely just one more intelligent species amongst many millions of them scattered in the vastness of space and time.
-
- Posts: 1366
- Joined: August 18th, 2016, 11:29 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Paul Tillich
Re: Spiritual versus Religious
-
- Posts: 5161
- Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various
Re: Spiritual versus Religious
To use the above terms effectively, one has to be like entering into a contract with the parties one is communicating with. This meant both parties must lay out their intended definition of 'religion' and 'spirituality' then agree to a definition by consensus before they discuss any related contentious issues.
Thus like any deals and contracts both sides or all sides must trash out the their views and arrive at a common definition before discussion begins.
If there is no consensus, it is better not to start the discussion or debate, else it is apples and oranges talking pass each other.
Religion:
Personally I prefer the definition of 'religion' laid out by Ninian Smart who define religion as complying with 7 critical dimensions and he explained them in a thick book.
https://prezi.com/bjyy9j3vws6m/7-dimens ... -religion/
To the above I would add the existential crisis, dilemma and angst.
It is no point discussing religions if we do not agree to a common definition.
If we proceed then we have to be very aware of the differences.
Spirituality:
I define 'spirituality' as equivalent to the philosophical drive of humans towards optimizing the well being of the individual and therefrom humanity. Philosophical in this case is philosophy-proper.
As such spirituality encompasses whatever it takes at the meta-level for a person to do 'good' for oneself and its contribution to humanity.
In this case religion is one aspect of spirituality.
Thus all human actions and intentions are imbue with an element of spirituality at the meta-level, e.g. eat well, good exercise, right actions, are ultimately spiritual.
If 'spirituality' is defined in terms of a specific ideology, then there will be argument till the cow comes home.
This is out.Anthropomorphism is a key factor in the difference between being spiritual versus being religious.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 15148
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Spiritual versus Religious
What does that mean? It sounds like a contradiction.Dark Matter wrote: ↑January 29th, 2018, 12:39 amSome religions are radically non-anthropomorphic without denying the personhood of God.
- Frost
- Posts: 511
- Joined: January 20th, 2018, 2:44 pm
Re: Spiritual versus Religious
Spectrum wrote: ↑January 29th, 2018, 1:03 am Both 'religion' and 'spirituality' are very loose terms thus cannot have absolute meanings or even a standard common meanings especially within a philosophical forum.
To use the above terms effectively, one has to be like entering into a contract with the parties one is communicating with. This meant both parties must lay out their intended definition of 'religion' and 'spirituality' then agree to a definition by consensus before they discuss any related contentious issues.
Thus like any deals and contracts both sides or all sides must trash out the their views and arrive at a common definition before discussion begins.
If there is no consensus, it is better not to start the discussion or debate, else it is apples and oranges talking pass each other.
Religion:
Personally I prefer the definition of 'religion' laid out by Ninian Smart who define religion as complying with 7 critical dimensions and he explained them in a thick book.
https://prezi.com/bjyy9j3vws6m/7-dimens ... -religion/
To the above I would add the existential crisis, dilemma and angst.
It is no point discussing religions if we do not agree to a common definition.
If we proceed then we have to be very aware of the differences.
Spirituality:
I define 'spirituality' as equivalent to the philosophical drive of humans towards optimizing the well being of the individual and therefrom humanity. Philosophical in this case is philosophy-proper.
As such spirituality encompasses whatever it takes at the meta-level for a person to do 'good' for oneself and its contribution to humanity.
In this case religion is one aspect of spirituality.
Thus all human actions and intentions are imbue with an element of spirituality at the meta-level, e.g. eat well, good exercise, right actions, are ultimately spiritual.
If 'spirituality' is defined in terms of a specific ideology, then there will be argument till the cow comes home.
The 7 dimensions of religion seem to be very biased in the western direction, despite mentioning eastern religions. Under the dimension of experience, nowhere was it mentioned any experience of God/reality or any meditative/contemplative practice. It seems difficult to me to have a conception of religion without that element. This is found in the mystic elements of all religions.
And with respect to spirituality, you seem to have defined it in a way that has nothing to do with the spirit. What you described seems like a form of humanism or morality rather than spirituality.
- Albert Tatlock
- Posts: 183
- Joined: October 15th, 2017, 3:23 pm
Re: Spiritual versus Religious
You've made no mention of those of us who are neither spiritual nor religious, don't we matter? I think you're being something that probably ends in "ist".Metathought wrote: ↑January 28th, 2018, 9:40 pm Anthropomorphism is a key factor in the difference between being spiritual versus being religious.
-
- Posts: 1366
- Joined: August 18th, 2016, 11:29 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Paul Tillich
Re: Spiritual versus Religious
It’s classical theism.Greta wrote: ↑January 29th, 2018, 5:43 amWhat does that mean? It sounds like a contradiction.Dark Matter wrote: ↑January 29th, 2018, 12:39 amSome religions are radically non-anthropomorphic without denying the personhood of God.
It is simply false to imply that Thomists and other critics of theistic personalism regard God as “impersonal.” When classical theists that God is not “a person,” they do NOT mean that God is impersonal, an “it” rather than a “he.” On the contrary, most classical theists, including all Thomists, would say that among the divine attributes are intellect, will, omniscience, freedom, and love. Naturally then, they regard God as personal rather than impersonal, since nothing impersonal could intelligibly be said to possess these attributes. The problem with the thesis that “God is a person” is not the word “person,” but rather the word “a.” It seems that the first time the English language formula “God is a person” appears in the history of Christian theology is in the 1644 heresy trial, in Gloucester, England, of someone named John Biddle.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 15148
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Spiritual versus Religious
-
- Posts: 1366
- Joined: August 18th, 2016, 11:29 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Paul Tillich
-
- Posts: 10339
- Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Re: Spiritual versus Religious
-
- Posts: 10339
- Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Re: Spiritual versus Religious
Atheist-ist. Is that a thing?You've made no mention of those of us who are neither spiritual nor religious, don't we matter? I think you're being something that probably ends in "ist".
-
- Posts: 3258
- Joined: December 14th, 2011, 9:42 am
Re: Spiritual versus Religious
Spirituality as I understand it, is something that can be explored without a strict book of rules, such that there are many spiritual paths that people can take. I think that both religion and spirituality claim to be the truth or a means of discovering the truth, be it an esoteric truth or something more down to earth such as the golden rule. Whilst I think that there aspects of religion and spirituality that correlate with people's experiences, I am sceptical about religious/spiritual ideologies purporting to be the truth. There are so many different religions and spiritual paths that people can take, all with differing perspectives that correlate with different aspects of the human condition, making them all “right” in some ways or certain areas, in an anecdotal sense.
It is difficult to claim which religion or spiritual path is the "best" for people to be engaged in, which most enhances life or which is most "right", because different ideologies and practices work for different people, and for the people whom religion and/or spirituality has worked for, the fact that it has been useful to them probably reinforces their beliefs in the truth it purports.
-
- Posts: 1366
- Joined: August 18th, 2016, 11:29 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Paul Tillich
Re: Spiritual versus Religious
Oh, geez. Why are you so literal? It’s analogical. Most religious language is. It’s both/and, not either/or. It’s Father-Mother in one parent combined: two principles in one God. “He” or “she” depends entirely on how you relate.
Fanman:
I think you will agree when I say, “Beware of the TRUTH.”
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023