Does the human mind reflect spirituality or atheism?

[Alceste]

(I wouldn't have used Buddhism, Alceste, as some brands are theistic. But others aren't, so.... )

True enough, but I was trying to keep things nice and simple.

I don't agree, Alceste. Science cannot address theism generally. It has no way of coping with the supernatural (if such exists), and if God is outside our reality, how in the world could we test for that?

I'm pretty sure that's another way of saying what I said, or at least what I meant to say even if it didn't come off that way. Science has nothing to do with god-belief, and it is compatible with atheism for this reason. That was my point, since atheism (mine, anyway) has nothing to do with god-belief either.

However, I freely admit that there are certain teachings of certain theists which make scientific claims and are easily debunked, YEC being the glaringly obvious example. But that doesn't mean that science is any more compatible with atheism than theism, generally speaking.

Well I'd say it depends on the brand of theism in question, but science is definitely more compatible with a perspective that does not attempt to plug all the holes in our understanding of the universe with religious dogma. Non-theists don't face a crisis of faith whenever some hole they thought an unknowable God lived in is filled in with empirical understanding. Then again, pantheists don't either.

 

[Autodidact]

Your question is valid and honest--and complex. Also personal. You're grappling with theism vs. atheism. This is a question everyone has to figure out for themselves. I will try to communicate my personal approach to some of what you're getting at, and while I hope it will help, it is really hard to transmit it across the gap between me and you (or anyone else.)

For me, the only faith I have is in reality. If there is a God, I think I will find Her there. I start from reality and the empirical, scientific study of reality. It seems to me that has done the best job of giving us knowledge about the world we live in.

The more I study reality, the natural ("material") world, the more mysterious, wonderful and spiritual I find it. As you progress in understanding the discoveries of modern physics and biology, you begin (or rather, I begin) to piece together a vision of the universe that is much like that of the highest spiritual thinkers.

For example, spiritual leaders try to get us to see that the universe is One, and we part of that One. It turns out to be completely true, according to the most recent research into physics. There is only one kind of stuff in the universe, energy/matter, which can transmute, but never come into existence or go out of existence. We are all temporary arrangements or manifestations of this eternal stuff: you, me, a trilobite and the horseshoe nebula. The energy/matter that is you right this millisecond will be part of the air in a moment, and one day spread across the sky, in what is a moment in universal time. I find this a spiritual, but factual, way to understand who we are.

That's just one example. I could go on and on. We're all related to all organisms, literally related, a distant cousin to every living thing, and a close cousin to every human being who has ever lived. I'm sure you can imagine how understanding this might affect your thinking on ethics.

It turns out that we are naturally evolved to be kind and compassionate, and that kindness and compassion give us joy. Being selfish and grasping does not lead to personal happiness.

Other kinds of people are not evil and we don't have to destroy them. On the contrary, they are pretty much just like us, and it is quite possible to live in peace with them.

All this is science, pure science.

Some see in this a powerful being behind it all, and that well may be. But one other thing I get from science is that any such being would be so far outside our comprehension that we might as well treat It as not existing, which is what I do. If it makes you feel better to conceptualize it that way, O.K. I just leave huge question marks around the edge of our understanding of everything, where it shades off into stuff we don't and can't know. And I can live with that.

I find this stuff hard to discuss with other people, but I enjoy open-minded discussion of it, so am happy to do so if you are interested.

 

[Autodidact]

I don't discount the fact that god may have created us via evolution, I do believe he created the whole universe and all its complexities, I suppose I was wondering how such a mind as a human's could evolve without any spiritual input and I suppose that is a question for the atheists amongst us.

For me, mind is the action of brain. And I think ToE explains the evolution of our brain pretty well. We evolved these brains because they helped our ancestors survive in their environment.

 

[Yes Man]

But I also think that view fails to take into account the ubiquity of beliefs in spirits and such.

I think the "scientists" of the world are content with the idea of mass hysteria and delusion in regards to that.

 

[Storm]

True enough, but I was trying to keep things nice and simple.

Fair enough.

I'm pretty sure that's another way of saying what I said, or at least what I meant to say even if it didn't come off that way. Science has nothing to do with god-belief, and it is compatible with atheism for this reason. That was my point, since atheism (mine, anyway) has nothing to do with god-belief either.

Well I'd say it depends on the brand of theism in question, but science is definitely more compatible with a perspective that does not attempt to plug all the holes in our understanding of the universe with religious dogma. Non-theists don't face a crisis of faith whenever some hole they thought an unknowable God lived in is filled in with empirical understanding. Then again, pantheists don't either.

Oh, ok. I guess I misunderstood, then. Apologies.

 

[Autodidact]

The question is whether the "input" of a supernatural being is required in order for sentience to arise. I consider sentience / awareness to be an emergent property which only requires a particular arrangement of self-organizing molecules (a brain) and a steady infusion of energy (food). If sentience could be an emergent property of self-organizing matter, then a supernatural being's input is not required. From what I gather, emergent properties are aspects of all complex systems, and the best empirical evidence available to us suggests there is no need for the interference of a supernatural being for us to be able to replicate natural conditions and observe self-organizing complex systems with emergent properties in a laboratory. So, since I like to stick to the most elegant and streamlined explanation for natural phenomena, and God is an un-necessary add-on, God gets the axe I'm afraid.

I should point out that the lack of a belief in God has zero impact on a person's spirituality, or their appreciation of art and beauty. And trees. And such like.

Like most things that Alceste posts I agree with every word.

 

[Autodidact]

Ok, I'll try tonight to explain what I mean. Spiritual to me is the belief that there is more to life than just to survive, that there is an extra dimension to our beings, our spirituality. I don't believe evolution is capable of giving us this invisible quality. It is the opposite of what evolution is about, rather than mindlessly fighting to be the strongest to survive which is how evolution works, the winner takes it all, spirituality asks us to help our fellow man to survive and not be so self centered. It is the nicer side of humanity and contradicts the law of the jungle, therefore has been put there by something other than random, mindless chemical reactions.

Spirituality is a vague and ambiguous word. I see your definition, but you don't say what you think that extra dimension is. For me, I find meaning and beauty from studying reality. I guess you could say I have faith of a sort, which is faith in reality. Whatever it turns out to be, I have faith that will be--I don't know, sufficient? Important? A firm basis? So I start there.

I have found a huge resource for altruism and compassion by studying both evolutionary biology and Tibetan Buddhism, with no personal God. In fact, I gave up eating mammals after studying evolutionary biology.

It is not the case that understanding ToE leads toward selfishness. On the contrary, we are among the most social creatures on earth, completely dependent on each other for survival. It is natural for us to love one another--the most natural thing in the world.

In fact, understanding human evolution has helped me understand why people do evil, why they are usually just mistaken, and how we can learn not to.

As in so many things, it turned out to match almost exactly with Tibetan Buddhist teaching. People aren't evil, they're just mistaken, and we should feel compassion even for those who perpetrate evil, because they are going about pursuing their own happiness in a way that cannot work.

 

[Autodidact]

Here's some quotes about my ethics that may or may not help you:

If you want others to be happy, practice compassion. If you want to be happy, practice compassion.
--Dalai Lama

When I do good I feel good, and when I do bad, I feel bad, and that is my religion.
--Abraham Lincoln

Your reward for living a good life is--a good life.
--The Happy Heretic

The purpose of our lives is to be happy.
--Dalai Lama again

Virtue is the science of happiness.
--me channeling Aristotle

 

[knockknock]

Spirituality is a vague and ambiguous word. I see your definition, but you don't say what you think that extra dimension is. For me, I find meaning and beauty from studying reality. I guess you could say I have faith of a sort, which is faith in reality. Whatever it turns out to be, I have faith that will be--I don't know, sufficient? Important? A firm basis? So I start there.

I have found a huge resource for altruism and compassion by studying both evolutionary biology and Tibetan Buddhism, with no personal God. In fact, I gave up eating mammals after studying evolutionary biology.

It is not the case that understanding ToE leads toward selfishness. On the contrary, we are among the most social creatures on earth, completely dependent on each other for survival. It is natural for us to love one another--the most natural thing in the world.

In fact, understanding human evolution has helped me understand why people do evil, why they are usually just mistaken, and how we can learn not to.

As in so many things, it turned out to match almost exactly with Tibetan Buddhist teaching. People aren't evil, they're just mistaken, and we should feel compassion even for those who perpetrate evil, because they are going about pursuing their own happiness in a way that cannot work.

I would like to thank you for your posts on this thread Autodidact. You have made a lot of sense and the method you used to convey your views has been ultra-effective for me, its much nicer than sarcasm or constant correction without any real feedback which one finds an awful lot here on the net. I will re read again later as I believe you have given me much food for thought. :yes:

 

[knockknock]

Yes you are entitled to your point of view, of course, I don't argue that at all. But you are not entitled to teach your point of view to my children as science in a science class in a secular school. Teach your point of view in church, or philosophy classes, or theology classes, or religious studies. Science class is for learning about science. Period.

You are assuming that I have strong views that I want to teach in schools?? I don't believe I have stated this, in fact my views are a constant 'work in progress' and I don't pretend to 'know everything', it is against my principles.

lol - sweetie, everybody has a strong dislike of that particular group of creationists

Ok honey, thanks for the heads up

 

[DarkSun]

The mind reflects no spirituality or rationality by itself. It depends on the culture we are raised in.

I would argue that we are governed by our natures as well as our nurture, but that's just me.

 

[Willamena]

The human mind reflects "I".

 

[Alceste]

You are assuming that I have strong views that I want to teach in schools?? I don't believe I have stated this, in fact my views are a constant 'work in progress' and I don't pretend to 'know everything', it is against my principles.

No, I'm not. That was the impersonal "you". In retrospect, it probably should have been a "they", and in any case it's about what they're (or you're, or I'm) entitled to do, not what they (you, I) want to do. Plus it was in also the context of your earlier comment that all this "evolution vs. God" nonsense was not entirely and purposefully instigated by a group of creationists. That fired me up a bit, because they were caught red-handed, and I care about facts. I only blame people when they are to blame.

Anyway, I apologize if I came off harshly, but it's provocative and a little offensive to suggest that atheists can't also be spiritual, and can't appreciate (or create) art, beauty, poetry, nature, love, kindness, sugar, spice and everything nice. So in a way you kind of had it coming.

BTW, I am a songwriter. I play 5 instruments. I sketch, paint, make jewelry and blow glass. You're just flat out wrong about the whole art thing. Do you think Mark Twain couldn't appreciate good literature because he didn't believe in god?