• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Religion vs. Spirituality

Dans La Lune said:
Buddhism is generally indifferent to the existence of gods. Some variants acknowledge gods, but do not worship them or depend on them. Are there atheist Buddhists?

Secular Buddhism - Wikipedia
Click to expand...

Yes. If one doesn't believe in some form of a higher power,"energy", ghosts, faeries, etc or anything beyond the physical realm, then they are essentially Atheist.

Buddhism seems more like a secular philosophy than a religion, even though it is classified as such.
 
Dans La Lune said:


You forget the most awesome variant of atheism, the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster; sometimes called Pastafarianism.
Click to expand...


Well, I do believe in whole grain pasta. Pastas made with white flour are false prophets.
 
beancounter said:
I am not lying. My only agenda is explain that Atheism is rationalism. And crystal power isn't rational. Again, if someone believes in crystal power, they are just a Theist looking for a god alternative.
Click to expand...

Rationalism? Where did you get that from the definition of atheism? Buddhism is an atheistic religion, there is no god. By your wildly incorrect gatekeeper logic Buddhists can't be spiritual, which is nonsense because they're both religious and spiritual while being atheists. Why is it so important for you to completely redefine atheism to your own definition?

beancounter said:
Buddhism seems more like a secular philosophy than a religion, even though it is classified as such.
Click to expand...

Lol, so when you're given a concrete example of religious and spiritual atheists you just decide to redefine both terms to suit your initial wrong assertion.

Gatekeeper beancounter: Nobody is spiritual or religious unless they believe EXACTLY what I want them to!

Rising Sun said:
Yes, Atheists can be spiritual, but then they are no longer atheists.
Click to expand...

You are completely wrong. Spirituality does not require a deity. The only definition you could possibly construe for that to be true is to consider the Christian "holy spirit", which yes would require a deity. Spirituality in the actual definition of the word is not dependent on a deity. There are atheists that are both religious and spiritual, it is not mutually exclusive.

Rising Sun said:
I've see "atheists" run a gamut from "when you're dead, you're dead" to claiming Buddhists are atheists. Yes, technically "atheist" simply means not believing in a "God" or gods but often it means there is no such thing as existence after death. That the Universe just magically popped into existence and that nothing exists beyond the Universe. In short, according to which atheist one is talking to, they have as many wide-ranging beliefs as theists.
Click to expand...

What is your motivation to try to completely redefine what atheism means and put everyone into the same predefined box? The theism/atheism question is purely about belief in the existence of a deity. All other assumptions stop there. By definition ANYONE who does not believe in a deity is an atheist, so yes, most buddhists. We're not responsible to live up to the atheist strawman you invented in your head.
 
Last edited:
RabidAlpaca said:
Rationalism? Where did you get that from the definition of atheism? Buddhism is an atheistic religion, there is no god. By your wildly incorrect gatekeeper logic Buddhists can't be spiritual, which is nonsense because they're both religious and spiritual while being atheists. Why is it so important for you to completely redefine atheism to your own definition?



Lol, so when you're given a concrete example of religious and spiritual atheists you just decide to redefine both terms to suit your initial wrong assertion.

Gatekeeper beancounter: Nobody is spiritual or religious unless they believe EXACTLY what I want them to!



You are completely wrong. Spirituality does not require a deity. The only definition you could possibly construe for that to be true is to consider the Christian "holy spirit", which yes would require a deity. Spirituality in the actual definition of the word is not dependent on a deity. There are atheists that are both religious and spiritual, it is not mutually exclusive.



What is your motivation to try to completely redefine what atheism means and put everyone into the same predefined box? The theism/atheism question is purely about belief in the existence of a deity. All other assumptions stop there. By definition ANYONE who does not believe in a deity is an atheist, so yes, most buddhists. We're not responsible to live up to the atheist strawman you invented in your head.
Click to expand...


Boy, this topic really gets under your skin. Why is that? What is your agenda?

And just so you know, I don't care what you believe, or don't believe. It's just not important to me.
 
beancounter said:
Boy, this topic really gets under your skin. Why is that? What is your agenda?

And just so you know, I don't care what you believe, or don't believe. It's just not important to me.
Click to expand...

You're so emotional and detached from reality you're redefining words to meet your personal definition. You've been completely unable to form any arguments showing the definition of atheism prevents spirituality or that spirituality requires a deity. Just a lazy gatekeeper spouting nonsense.
 
beancounter said:
My only agenda is explain that Atheism is rationalism.
Click to expand...

Which is fine, but you should also admit that you're redefining the word atheism in a way that most other people, including most atheists, don't agree with.
 
Dragonfly said:
Which is fine, but you should also admit that you're redefining the word atheism in a way that most other people, including most atheists, don't agree with.
Click to expand...

Well is it rational to believe in the existence of a deity?

Atheist do not believe in a god of the gaps, and faeries, ghost, spirits, nature and crystal energy, etc are just gap substitutes.
 
Rising Sun said:
I've see "atheists" run a gamut from "when you're dead, you're dead" to claiming Buddhists are atheists. Yes, technically "atheist" simply means not believing in a "God" or gods but often it means there is no such thing as existence after death. That the Universe just magically popped into existence and that nothing exists beyond the Universe. In short, according to which atheist one is talking to, they have as many wide-ranging beliefs as theists.
Click to expand...

beancounter said:
Dragonfly said:
Which is fine, but you should also admit that you're redefining the word atheism in a way that most other people, including most atheists, don't agree with.
Click to expand...
Well is it rational to believe in the existence of a deity?

Atheist do not believe in a god of the gaps, and faeries, ghost, spirits, nature and crystal energy, etc are just gap substitutes.
Click to expand...
QED. Even self-proclaimed atheists can't agree on what it means to be an atheist.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
You're so emotional and detached from reality you're redefining words to meet your personal definition. You've been completely unable to form any arguments showing the definition of atheism prevents spirituality or that spirituality requires a deity. Just a lazy gatekeeper spouting nonsense.
Click to expand...

No, people who believe in deities and/or deity substitutes are detached from reality.

You do not see yourself as a gatekeeper? Have you ever heard of projection?

download.png
 
beancounter said:
Well is it rational to believe in the existence of a deity?
Click to expand...

Nope. On that we, and most atheists should agree.

beancounter said:
Atheist do not believe in a god of the gaps, and faeries, ghost, spirits, nature and crystal energy, etc are just gap substitutes.
Click to expand...

There's where you start redefining the word to a place where most won't agree.

Atheists can, and I'm sure plenty do, believe in all kinds of irrational things, just as theists do.

Atheism is ONLY about god or gods. Period.
 
Dragonfly said:
religionspirituality.jpg



I've seen a few pics like the above on Facebook. Raises a few questions that might be worth discussion.

1) Can one be spiritual without being religious?
2) Can one be religious without being spiritual?
3) In your mind, what are the major differences between "religion" and "spirituality"? Does the above pic capture the basic differences?
4) If there is a god(s), which one might be more important from god's perspective?


A slightly different question:
Can Atheists be spiritual?

A very different question:
Which of the two, spiritual or religious, is potentially more dangerous?
Click to expand...

I personally distinguish the two as follows. Religious is being part of an established system with some form of definitive beliefs and established dictates that one follows. Spirituality is about "experiencing" the divine or supernatural and that can be experienced in many different ways typically through in nature. Say someone meditating in a garden during a sunny day. Both forms do hold to some extent or another a belief in either a deity or supernatural form of existence.
 
beancounter said:
No, people who believe in deities and/or deity substitutes are detached from reality.

You do not see yourself as a gatekeeper? Have you ever heard of projection?

View attachment 67271637
Click to expand...

You're trying to redefine the word atheism to mean all kinds of things. There are rational and irrational atheists, the theism/atheism question gives no information about rationality, only if they believe or don't believe in a deity.

The worst part about your posts is you don't try to explain or rationalize your position, you just constantly repeat you're right while providing no justification. What other things have you added to the term atheism? Do you assert they all must like breakfast cereal to be a true atheist?

Rising Sun said:
QED. Even self-proclaimed atheists can't agree on what it means to be an atheist.
Click to expand...

It's a term, not a religious group. That's about as stupid as saying theists can't even agree on what being a theist means. If you don't believe in god you're an atheist, full stop. There's no other information that term provides.
 
Cynical said:
I personally distinguish the two as follows. Religious is being part of an established system with some form of definitive beliefs and established dictates that one follows. Spirituality is about "experiencing" the divine or supernatural and that can be experienced in many different ways typically through in nature. Say someone meditating in a garden during a sunny day. Both forms do hold to some extent or another a belief in either a deity or supernatural form of existence.
Click to expand...

Does having a spirituality require a "deity" or "supernatural"?

Can someone be very spiritual about nature for instance? Just really into the natural world without there having to be a supernatural aspect to it?
 
Dragonfly said:
religionspirituality.jpg



I've seen a few pics like the above on Facebook. Raises a few questions that might be worth discussion.

1) Can one be spiritual without being religious?
2) Can one be religious without being spiritual?
3) In your mind, what are the major differences between "religion" and "spirituality"? Does the above pic capture the basic differences?
4) If there is a god(s), which one might be more important from god's perspective?


A slightly different question:
Can Atheists be spiritual?

A very different question:
Which of the two, spiritual or religious, is potentially more dangerous?
Click to expand...

IMO, spiritual is communing by yourself. Religious is showing off in front of a crowd.

Spiritual is not caring what others think. Religious is conforming to what others say.

Spiritual is quiet. Religion is loud.

Spiritual leaves others be. Religion will kill others who do not agree.
 
Dragonfly said:
Does having a spirituality require a "deity" or "supernatural"?

Can someone be very spiritual about nature for instance? Just really into the natural world without there having to be a supernatural aspect to it?
Click to expand...

Individual beliefs vary from person to person. You can have a group of atheists all of whom may have slightly nuanced variations of particular beliefs. Also atheism from an Eastern perspective would reject the notion of a personal god or force that you pray to in order to get something but still might believe in a supernatural force that permeates the universe and all life. I would say that most if not all people who consider themselves spiritual have some type of believe in the metaphysical or supernatural.
 
Cynical said:
Individual beliefs vary from person to person. You can have a group of atheists all of whom may have slightly nuanced variations of particular beliefs. Also atheism from an Eastern perspective would reject the notion of a personal god or force that you pray to in order to get something but still might believe in a supernatural force that permeates the universe and all life. I would say that most if not all people who consider themselves spiritual have some type of believe in the metaphysical or supernatural.
Click to expand...

I understand what you're saying. On some levels I agree. Probably many levels actually.

I just think a person can be spiritually tuned in to something like nature without there having to be a supernatural element to it.

I think a Taoist can be spiritual. I don't believe Taoists are deists, or conceptually supernatural.
 
Dragonfly said:
I understand what you're saying. On some levels I agree. Probably many levels actually.

I just think a person can be spiritually tuned in to something like nature without there having to be a supernatural element to it.

I think a Taoist can be spiritual. I don't believe Taoists are deists, or conceptually supernatural.
Click to expand...

My objection to that would be that any traditional definition of spiritual involves something metaphysical, for example: relating to or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things.


Atheism is Western thought generally if not definitively rejects any notion of immaterial existence. Western atheism typically are variations of philosophical Naturalism, Materialism, and even Reductionism. My studies of Eastern Philosophy, which is not extensive would try to explain it this way. I believe one of the influences of Buddhism was a rejection of aspects of Hinduism which involved praying to God to get things. So it was observed that many poor hungry people prayed and didn't get things and in most cases they lived a life of suffering. Consider the four Noble Truths of Buddhism:

The Four Noble Truths

The truth of suffering (Dukkha)
The truth of the origin of suffering (Samudāya)
The truth of the cessation of suffering (Nirodha)
The truth of the path to the cessation of suffering (Magga)

And the subsequent wight fold path that was developed to address that. So my assessment of Eastern religion is largely a rejection of the Theistic practice of praying to God in order to get something. So in that regard you can still have various forms of spirituality that accept the metaphysical but reject there being a personal entity whom you pray to in order to procure favors.

The bottom line then for me is that there is a distinction of an Eastern Atheist from an Western Atheist.
 
Cynical said:
My objection to that would be that any traditional definition of spiritual involves something metaphysical, for example: relating to or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things.


Atheism is Western thought generally if not definitively rejects any notion of immaterial existence. Western atheism typically are variations of philosophical Naturalism, Materialism, and even Reductionism. My studies of Eastern Philosophy, which is not extensive would try to explain it this way. I believe one of the influences of Buddhism was a rejection of aspects of Hinduism which involved praying to God to get things. So it was observed that many poor hungry people prayed and didn't get things and in most cases they lived a life of suffering. Consider the four Noble Truths of Buddhism:

The Four Noble Truths

The truth of suffering (Dukkha)
The truth of the origin of suffering (Samudāya)
The truth of the cessation of suffering (Nirodha)
The truth of the path to the cessation of suffering (Magga)

And the subsequent wight fold path that was developed to address that. So my assessment of Eastern religion is largely a rejection of the Theistic practice of praying to God in order to get something. So in that regard you can still have various forms of spirituality that accept the metaphysical but reject there being a personal entity whom you pray to in order to procure favors.

The bottom line then for me is that there is a distinction of an Eastern Atheist from an Western Atheist.
Click to expand...

Great post. :allhail
 
Dragonfly said:
Does having a spirituality require a "deity" or "supernatural"?

Can someone be very spiritual about nature for instance? Just really into the natural world without there having to be a supernatural aspect to it?
Click to expand...

Dragonfly said:
I understand what you're saying. On some levels I agree. Probably many levels actually.

I just think a person can be spiritually tuned in to something like nature without there having to be a supernatural element to it.

I think a Taoist can be spiritual. I don't believe Taoists are deists, or conceptually supernatural.
Click to expand...

So what exactly do you mean by spiritual?

I enjoy observing nature, but I don't consider it a spiritual pursuit. I consider it a physical, intellectual, and emotional pursuit. Your use of spiritual seems to me like another way of saying something that you enjoy deeply. But I think the word spiritual implies something a bit more than that, and I'm not sure exactly what that something more is. I'm not sure that the word can be seen as separate from the idea that there is a non-physical aspect to human existence, which is also an idea embraced by religious thinking. I'm not so sure spirituality can be extricated from this kind of thinking, and that it is not so different in its nature.
 
Dragonfly said:
1) Can one be spiritual without being religious?
Click to expand...

Yes

2) Can one be religious without being spiritual?
Click to expand...

In the strictest use of the word "religious", yes, but I'm going to limit myself to the context of the forum and say no

3) In your mind, what are the major differences between "religion" and "spirituality"? Does the above pic capture the basic differences?
Click to expand...

I think the pics wrong. Religion is a defined and structured, however loosely that may be, belief system that includes details on what you are and are not supposed to do. Spirituality is more vague and the morals are not so strictly defined, but there is still a higher power of some sort there, be it the Ancestors or a Deity.

4) If there is a god(s), which one might be more important from god's perspective?
Click to expand...

Quite honestly that can depend upon the deity. Some might wants strict adherence, such as how the radical Muslim (not necessarily all Muslims) one seems to want, while others are more "just be good", as can be evidenced by some worshipers of the Goddess.

A slightly different question:
Can Atheists be spiritual?
Click to expand...

That really depends.onnhow one views atheism. More radical atheists would claim there cannot be any supernatural anything at all, thus no. Others might believe that while there are no deities per se', that doesn't rule out other supernatural possibilities.

A very different question:
Which of the two, spiritual or religious, is potentially more dangerous?
Click to expand...

Neither, in and of themselves. It is the individual being that would make such dangerous.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk
 
beancounter said:
No, a true Atheist can not be spiritual. People who are spiritual usually believe in some form of ambiguous higher power such as "nature" or energy of the universe, etc.

A true Atheist does not believe in any type of unverifiable force (conscious or not) that controls/brings order to the universe.
Click to expand...
But would not believing only in a higher nebulous power, but no deity, be atheist by the strictest definition?

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom