Wilco and atheism

[lost highway]

The soul precedes/succeeds the corporal body? Does the Buddist look at others as having souls? Do they run parallel or are they part of a communal eternity?

 

The word soul implies something indivisible, immortal and having inherently personal characteristics. The Buddhist belief in the will to live and the energy, or Karma in a life force, could be compared to the Western conception of a soul, but in other ways is different. When you die you don't have an individual private soul that is reproduced in another life force, or on another plane. Instead, the inner substance that runs you is recycled into the universal, and impersonal mass of energy that fills all things.

[Spawn's dad]

even in those sects that have strong leanings in reincarnation it is not a soul that is reincarnated. this holds true with tibetan buddhism, though it is good to recall that form of buddhism has strong roots in tibet's native bon religion.

 

what's reborn is the carrying forth of the results of our actions.

[EL the Famous]

Yeah, I wonder. I guess I never really gave it all that much thought. I believe that we are all connected in some way. I believe that art and music are the best evidence for this. I don't think everything that can answered by science. And I dont think OPS is the only way to judge a hitter in baseball. There are intangibles. And yet I dont believe that someone/something or a God started everything, or created us in His image, etc.

 

true that. i like to take solace in vast possibility in those intangibles, doesn't matter to me if you can explain their eventual tangibility in science or god...as long it something postive we can all hang our collective hats on, amen or, if your so inclined, hooray.

 

or, what einstein said.

[Central Scrutinizer]

Conversely, deeply held religious belief is not a sure sign of spirituality, I know and have known many people who suffer their religion, folks who treat it as something to be mourned of blindly followed like a recipe

[bjorn_skurj]

And it is the ubiquity and persistence of these stories throughout human history that is so very interesting to me.

The power of myth.

[Central Scrutinizer]

The word soul implies something indivisible, immortal and having inherently personal characteristics. The Buddhist belief in the will to live and the energy, or Karma in a life force, could be compared to the Western conception of a soul, but in other ways is different. When you die you don't have an individual private soul that is reproduced in another life force, or on another plane. Instead, the inner substance that runs you is recycled into the universal, and impersonal mass of energy that fills all things.

That is as I've always assumed it. In that sense, *it* exists outside of the corporal experience which goes back to the *whys* (Why am I here?). I would say that is a theology. But there's no sense in placing labels. It's a means to gaining sense and comfort with existence and a means of attaining a fullness of being.

[Good Old Neon]

A broad definition of what I refer to when I refer to the human soul:

 

The consensus among neuroscientists and biologists is that the mind, or consciousness, is the operation of the brain. They often fuse the terms mind and brain together as "mind/brain".[19] or bodymind. Science and medicine seek naturalistic accounts of the observable natural world. This stance is known as methodological naturalism[3] Much of the scientific study relating to the soul has been involved in investigating the soul as a human belief or as concept that shapes cognition and understanding of the world (see Memetics), rather than as an entity in and of itself.

 

When modern scientists speak of the soul outside of this cultural and psychological context, it is generally as a poetic synonym for mind. Francis Crick's book The Astonishing Hypothesis, for example, has the subtitle, "The scientific search for the soul". Crick held the position that one can learn everything knowable about the human soul by studying the workings of the human brain. Depending on one's belief regarding the relationship between the soul and the mind, then, the findings of neuroscience may be relevant to one's understanding of the soul.

 

A search of the PubMed research literature database shows the following numbers of articles with the indicated term in the title:

 

1. brain

[lost highway]

The exception does not prove the rule.

 

I would argue that in general religion in the U.S. suffers from an overall lack of spirituality. This does not mean that it is not present, or that their are not deeply spiritual religious people in this country. I mean to say that most people that would check a box in a survey indicating that they are religious, likely a christian, would not walk through their day with any sense of illumination, or personal connection to the infinite.

 

I have heard Christian speakers regard books like John's gospel as something to be taken with a grain of salt because it is so 'spiritual'. (look out!). A lot of people interact with the New Testament as though it is a series of laws, prescriptions and proscriptions to be followed in order to ensure proper handling in the afterlife in the event that the gospel is true. I believe this to be a side effect of the narrow mindedness of the evangelical approach responsible for engaging much of middle America in religion. It also seems to be a product of certain cultural norms and philosophical beliefs that supersede people's experience as a Christian in ways they can not account for.

[EL the Famous]

100% wrong

[lost highway]

That is as I've always assumed it. In that sense, *it* exists outside of the corporal experience which goes back to the *whys* (Why am I here?). I would say that is a theology. But there's no sense in placing labels. It's a means to gaining sense and comfort with existence and a means of attaining a fullness of being.

 

I think that's true.

[Central Scrutinizer]

I would argue that in general religion in the U.S. suffers from an overall lack of spirituality. This does not mean that it is not present, or that their are not deeply spiritual religious people in this country. I mean to say that most people that would check a box in a survey indicating that they are religious, likely a christian, would not walk through their day with any sense of illumination, or personal connection to the infinite.

 

I have heard Christian speakers regard books like John's gospel as something to be taken with a grain of salt because it is so 'spiritual'. (look out!). A lot of people interact with the New Testament as though it is a series of laws, prescriptions and proscriptions to be followed in order to ensure proper handling in the afterlife in the event that the gospel is true. I believe this to be a side effect of the narrow mindedness of the evangelical approach responsible for engaging much of middle America in religion. It also seems to be a product of certain cultural norms and philosophical beliefs that supersede people's experience as a Christian in ways they can not account for.

That is a great irony, since the nature of the new testament (other than Paul's politics) is the freedom of the old testament constraints (other than snipping your thingie and the whole blood thing). In that sense jnick is most assuredly right; there is a nature among many people to wish to surrender control, they look to create rules where there are none. But as you point out, this is not spiritual, this is operational.

 

It's embarrassing, in some cases to see churches -- through "contemporary" or "alternative" services (u2charist) to recreate spirituality.

[MattZ]

that's great, but the actual definition of 'spirtual' and, ergo, 'spirituality' is not 'complete awe of the natural world'. i'm not saying that neither your or darryl dawkins lack of faith = lack of appreciation of the natural world. nor did i say that deeply held religious belief is a sure sign of spirituality. so, i don't really understand your point.

 

I'm with EL on this one, jnick. There's a difference between acknowledging intangibles and being in awe of the natural world.

[lost highway]

That is a great irony, since the nature of the new testament (other than Paul's politics) is the freedom of the old testament constraints (other than snipping your thingie and the whole blood thing). In that sense jnick is most assuredly right; there is a nature among many people to wish to surrender control, they look to create rules where there are none. But as you point out, this is not spiritual, this is operational.

 

It's embarrassing, in some cases to see churches -- through "contemporary" or "alternative" services (u2charist) to recreate spirituality.

 

I think so. In fact, I think Paul distorted the nature or Christianity quite a bit. Usually the more silly or disgusting things people call Christian strike me as being more Pauline than anything else. It's important to remember the Gospel as the 'good news'.

[EL the Famous]

should my personal relationship w/ god ever become more about how i can't measure up in his eyes than him being happy w/ me trying, both of us knowing good and well that i will never be perfect...i'll start bowling w/ chris hitchens and richard dawson.

[Good Old Neon]

that's great, but the actual definition of 'spirtual' and, ergo, 'spirituality' is not 'complete awe of the natural world'. i'm not saying that neither your or darryl dawkins lack of faith = lack of appreciation of the natural world. nor did i say that deeply held religious belief is a sure sign of spirituality. so, i don't really understand your point.

 

Interesting, as it is very likely that religion

[Spawn's dad]

funny you should quote Kerouac who was a drunk and an utterly confused Buddhist

[Good Old Neon]

funny you should quote Kerouac who was a drunk and an utterly confused Buddhist

 

And a catholic no less!

 

I have tremendous respect for the principles of Buddhism.

[Moe_Syzlak]

The mere fact this thread is still going is proof enough for me that there is no God!

 

(Seriously though, I'm glad to see that the conversation is a bit more civil today. It's great to see this sort of intelligent dialogue and makes me wonder why, if an Internet message board can do it, why can't we do it on a national stage.)

[Spawn's dad]

sorry, mate, but buddhism hinges on the same unproveable things you're railing against with other religions

 

"Then, monks, being subject myself to birth, seeing the drawbacks of birth, seeking the unborn, unexcelled rest from the yoke, Unbinding, I reached the unborn, unexcelled rest from the yoke: Unbinding. Being subject myself to aging... illness... death... sorrow... defilement, seeing the drawbacks of aging... illness... death... sorrow... defilement, seeking the aging-less, illness-less, deathless, sorrow-less, unexcelled rest from the yoke, Unbinding, I reached the aging-less, illness-less, deathless, sorrow-less, unexcelled rest from the yoke: Unbinding. Knowledge & vision arose in me: 'Unprovoked is my release. This is the last birth. There is now no further becoming.'

[mfwahl]

This thread makes atheism so unattractive.

[Good Old Neon]

sorry, mate, but buddhism hinges on the same unproveable things you're railing against with other religions

 

True, but that does not mean one cannot draw inspiration from the underlying principles. My vegetarianism stems from the Buddhist belief that all life is

[Spawn's dad]

True, but that does not mean one cannot draw inspiration from the underlying principles. My vegetarianism stems from the Buddhist belief that all life is "sacred"

[Central Scrutinizer]

True, but that does not mean one cannot draw inspiration from the underlying principles. My vegetarianism stems from the Buddhist belief that all life is

[yermom]

This thread makes atheism so unattractive.

Awwww. After finally catching up on reading this thread, I was just thinking, "Damn, atheism is so hawt!" It's true.

[Good Old Neon]

god, that guy is an asshole

 

Yeah, I feel the same way about god as well.