Spiritualism vs. Materialism

[leibowde84]

I am mostly a spiritualist but I suspect this is a result of the brains ability to provide impressions instead of actual physical data to the conscious mind.

Spiritualism would have to do with improving the quality of the conscious experience. It's learning to adapt and better deal with the impressions which get provided to consciousness by the subconscious brain.

The poster asked that we stay inside the definitions of the terms provided (which are accurate). So, I think it would be beneficial to us all if we adhered to this request. Only fair I think, as he initiated the conversation.

 

[leibowde84]

[QUOTE="leibowde84, post: 4168084, member: 56049"]I am not a spiritualist, because I do not necessarily think that God has any influence on the physical realm, which, as I stated, could be all there is. I guess I would say that I am a materialist that has a personal longing for the spiritual world. It helps me, but it certainly doesn't shape the way that I think about the COSMOS. So, I certanly am more of a materialist than a spiritualist. The openness to the idea that God may or may not exist doesn't make you a spiritualist, does it?

In that case I would consider you 'undecided'.

My comment was based from your statement: I believe that there is a God in a different form of existence. You have backed away from that position which is your prerogative.[/QUOTE]
I haven't backed away. Belief is anlways unsure, or else it would be knowledge. I believe in God, but not because of any evidence other than my own personal, subjective experience. I understand that and actively seperate anything spiritual from my materialistic worldview of reality.

 

[Nakosis]

The poster asked that we stay inside the definitions of the terms provided (which are accurate). So, I think it would be beneficial to us all if we adhered to this request. Only fair I think, as he initiated the conversation.

I don't see where I haven't done that.

 

[George-ananda]

I would disagree, as I wholeheartedly think that the definition you provided for "materialism" is true. There is no part of me that does not. But, that doesn't mean that I also can't hold a belief in the supernatural if that belief does not attempt to provide a source of consciousness or life.

Unless this supernatural you accept is made of physical matter then you are not a materialist.

 

[leibowde84]

[QUOTE="leibowde84, post: 4168084, member: 56049"]I am not a spiritualist, because I do not necessarily think that God has any influence on the physical realm, which, as I stated, could be all there is. I guess I would say that I am a materialist that has a personal longing for the spiritual world. It helps me, but it certainly doesn't shape the way that I think about the COSMOS. So, I certanly am more of a materialist than a spiritualist. The openness to the idea that God may or may not exist doesn't make you a spiritualist, does it?

In that case I would consider you 'undecided'.

My comment was based from your statement: I believe that there is a God in a different form of existence. You have backed away from that position which is your prerogative.[/QUOTE]
My worldview is based on the definition you provided (below) for materialism. I wholeheartedly believe this to be the case.

Materialism is a form of philosophical monism which holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all phenomena, including mental phenomena and consciousness, are the result of material interactions.

But, at the same time, I believe I have a personal relationship with God. This belief, however, does not effect any of my beliefs adhering to materialism. So, you are wrong about them being mutually exclusive.

Belief, btw, is always unsure. Thais the nature of every belief.

 

[RedDragon94]

You can not be a materialist if you believe in a spiritual plane. You are a spiritualist of the two choices presented. They are mutually exclusive choices.

Well, the spiritual and the physical are codependent on each other. The spiritual decisions we make affect our physical well being and the simple decisions we make affect our circumstances now as well as in the next life. So I guess I am spiritual type of person but I believe without the physical there isn't much spiritual activity going on either.

 

[leibowde84]

Unless this supernatural you accept is made of physical matter then you are not a materialist.

Your definition does not say that a materialist cannot believe in other planes of existance, just that the material world be the fundamental realm. I guess you could say I am undecided, with aspects of both. But, I am certainly more leaning toward materialism.

 

[George-ananda]

Your definition does not say that a materialist cannot believe in other planes of existance, just that the material world be the fundamental realm. I guess you could say I am undecided, with aspects of both. But, I am certainly more leaning toward materialism.

No materialism is saying the physical realm is the only realm.

Materialism is a form of philosophical monism which holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that ALL PHENOMENA, including mental phenomena and consciousness, are the result of material interactions.

I put 'ALL PHENOMENA' in capital letters. Of course a spiritualist believes in the physical realm. But a materialist believes the physical realm is the only realm. That is the distinguishing question of the OP.

 

[George-ananda]

Well, the spiritual and the physical are codependent on each other. The spiritual decisions we make affect our physical well being and the simple decisions we make affect our circumstances now as well as in the next life. So I guess I am spiritual type of person but I believe without the physical there isn't much spiritual activity going on either.

I'm good with your beliefs but you are not understanding the definition of 'materialism'. You are a 'spirtualist' not a 'materialist'. Spiritualists certainly believe in a physical plane but that is not all they believe in. Materialists believe ONLY in a physical plane.

 

[RedDragon94]

I'm good with your beliefs but you are not understanding the definition of 'materialism'. You are a 'spirtualist' not a 'materialist'. Spiritualists certainly believe in a physical plane but that is not all they believe in. Materialists believe ONLY in a physical plane.

Okay. It almost makes materialism seem less open minded than spiritualism.

 

[George-ananda]

Okay. It almost makes materialism seem less open minded than spiritualism.

Materialism takes a much narrower view of reality than spiritualism. Materialism is an atheistic philosophy.

 

[RedDragon94]

Materialism takes a much narrower view of reality than spiritualism. Materialism is an atheistic philosophy.

So does somebody have to be a theist in order to be spiritual?

 

[George-ananda]

So does somebody have to be a theist in order to be spiritual?

Not necessarily but they very commonly go together. For example if someone believes in ghosts/souls/etc. but not God they would be a 'spiritualist' but not a theist (this is not common).

 

[leibowde84]

No materialism is saying the physical realm is the only realm.

Materialism is a form of philosophical monism which holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that ALL PHENOMENA, including mental phenomena and consciousness, are the result of material interactions.

I put 'ALL PHENOMENA' in capital letters. Of course a spiritualist believes in the physical realm. But a materialist believes the physical realm is the only realm. That is the distinguishing question of the OP.

It might be a flaw in the definition, but phenomena only classifies "observable" things. Only materialistic things are "observable" according to the definition of the term, so my belief in God in the limited way it exists would not be "observable." Thus, I do believe that all phenomena are the result of material interactions.

Here is the definition of "phenomena."

a fact or situation that is observed to exist or happen, especially one whose cause or explanation is in question.

Here is the definition of "observable."

able to be noticed or perceived; discernible.

 

[leibowde84]

It might be a flaw in the definition, but phenomena only classifies "observable" things. Only materialistic things are "observable" according to the definition of the term, so my belief in God in the limited way it exists would not be "observable." Thus, I do believe that all phenomena are the result of material interactions.

Here is the definition of "phenomena."

a fact or situation that is observed to exist or happen, especially one whose cause or explanation is in question.

Here is the definition of "observable."

able to be noticed or perceived; discernible.

There is nothing in my belief of God that is "observable."

 

[Nakosis]

Materialism takes a much narrower view of reality than spiritualism. Materialism is an atheistic philosophy.

It takes a broader view of what physical reality is capable of.

It's really just claiming a supernatural or non-physical explanation is unnecessary to explain reality.

 

[RedDragon94]

Not necessarily but they very commonly go together. For example if someone believes in ghosts/souls/etc. but not God they would be a 'spiritualist' but not a theist (this is not common).

Thanks for helping me find some clarity.

 

[George-ananda]

It might be a flaw in the definition, but phenomena only classifies "observable" things. Only materialistic things are "observable" according to the definition of the term, so my belief in God in the limited way it exists would not be "observable." Thus, I do believe that all phenomena are the result of material interactions.

Here is the definition of "phenomena."

a fact or situation that is observed to exist or happen, especially one whose cause or explanation is in question.

Here is the definition of "observable."

able to be noticed or perceived; discernible.

The word 'phenomena' includes any real event; even those called 'paranormal phenomena'.

 

[leibowde84]

No, the word 'phenomena' includes any real event; even those called 'paranormal phenomena'.

Then why is the word "observe" used, and why isn't that specified in the definition. In other words, can you support your claim that subjective supernatural events can be "observed" according to the definition of the term.

 

[George-ananda]

Then why is the word "observe" used, and why isn't that specified in the definition. In other words, can you support your claim that subjective supernatural events can be "observed" according to the definition of the term.

Yes, for there to be a paranormal event there must be a human that OBSERVED it (or nobody would even know there was a paranormal event). It might be through their normal senses or an extra-sense. I saw a ghost means the ghost was observed.