by VorJack
For me, one of the most fraught and frustrating words in the english language is the word “spiritual.” Salman Rushdie once complained that everything in Western culture gets stuck with the “spiritual” label. Even walking your dog could be considered spiritual.
There was an episode of Nature dealing with Death Valley. They interviewed some participants in a marathon that ran through the heart of one of the hottest places on earth. One participant, a doctor who could have done a great impression of a dessicated corpse, acknowledged that the race did lasting physical harm to the participants. But, he said, there were spiritual rewards.
Here, “spiritual” is being used as a synonym for “stupid”.
What does the word “spiritual” mean to you? Is there any use for it?
I have never really sit down and thought about what it means. I think it is one of those words that people seldom use the dictionary definition but come up with one of their own for it.
I think “spiritual” gets used to cover any experience in which a person is either deeply introspective, deeply calm (almost trance-state calm) or both. Of course certain environments promote those states of being.
“Of course certain environments promote those states of being”
Couldn’t possibly have anything to do with man possessing a spirit, in essence is a spirit albeit cloaked in flesh could it Custy? I mean, that might be at least partially causal?
All the best sir :)
I think we’re going to have to agree to differ on this one, John.
Before you could use that argument, John C, you would first have to establish that man possesses a spirit. Until then, you are multiplying entities needlessly in order to explain the phenomenon (or more likely, phenomena) called spirituality.
LOL I once had a “spiritual” experience — it involved hallucinogenic herbs.
Best kind there is :D
Gotta find me more of that sweet Salvia one of these days. I seriously couldn’t stop smiling for, like, at least a week.
Salvia made me feel like I was taking a bath in human hair. I can think of at least two shops in Cardiff that sell it.
I can’t say I had a positive experience on Salvia. Mostly just akathisic dysphoria and profuse sweating.
Yeah, it’s one of those trips where it’s either a really good trip, or a really bad trip.
Either way, you WILL learn about yourself.
Honestly, I didn’t rate it that highly. I did, however think that my left leg was fifteen feet long and attempt to go down an entire flight of stairs in one step….
“Spiritual” no longer has any meaning. Neither has “inspiration”, as walking your dog can now be inspiring too.
I found a video on youtube by a chap called AHughman08. I thought it was a good take on spirituality.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2nfXfTg92E
Good video. Thanks for linking that.
Yup … that pretty much sums it up for me.
I think it’s important to note that this is a redefinition of a word in order to suit our own purposes. This is not something I have a problem with in general, but I would never call myself “spiritual” in a discussion with a christian.
The “spiritual” experiences I had as a christian varied on the scale from the emotions described in the video to downright crowd-manipulation and madness. However, as I got older I gradually experienced more of the former and less of the latter, most probably due to an awareness of my own fallibility and the existence of frauds making me less prone to the manipulation of prophets and preachers. Nevertheless, I still failed to differentiate between the legitimate experiences and the woo.
A final note: Beauty never made me cry until I was liberated from my religion.
The word “spiritual” means nothing to me. I used to believe the mumbo-jumbo…for instance, I used to think that meditating once a day(that is, sit with your legs crossed and your eyes closed and do nothing for an hour) would be beneficial to me. Luckily I was too lazy to actually put forth the effort to meditate and instead did other, more useful, things.
My favorite definition of spirituality is this, from Daniel Dennett:
One needn’t call what he describes “spirituality,” but it often works for those who care about the word.
I like the word harmony better then spiritual. Like for engaging in physical acitivities; afterwords or during i can feel that my body is in harmony for doing something that makes the adrenalin flow. Or i can feel in harmony with nature when i walk in the woods with my 5 dogs and spring makes the woods so damn beautiful.
Give me anything “spititual” and i will feel hamrony instead.
I like this. I have often felt the same way living in the mountains, away from people. To have the huge variety of birds, to have generation of deer and fox just hanging out in my backyard makes me feel something completely emotional and happy.
I think Harmony is what I’m feeling.
Spiritual is a souped up version of the word “epiphany”.
Instead of giving your own mind credit, you’re trying to give a higher being credit for your emotions and findings.
It’s a frustrating word, to be sure. I’d like to reclaim the original Latin meaning (“to breathe”), were it possible, because I feel a strong sense of awe with respect to the mystery of life, and I think that awe would be a step forward from the medieval belief in holy ghosts that presently abounds.
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=spirit
c.1250, “animating or vital principle in man and animals,” from O.Fr. espirit, from L. spiritus “soul, courage, vigor, breath,” related to spirare “to breathe,” from PIE *(s)peis- “to blow” (cf. O.C.S. pisto “to play on the flute”). Original usage in Eng. mainly from passages in Vulgate, where the L. word translates Gk. pneuma and Heb. ruah. Distinction between “soul” and “spirit” (as “seat of emotions”) became current in Christian terminology (e.g. Gk. psykhe vs. pneuma, L. anima vs. spiritus) but “is without significance for earlier periods” [Buck]. L. spiritus, usually in classical L. “breath,” replaces animus in the sense “spirit” in the imperial period and appears in Christian writings as the usual equivalent of Gk. pneuma. Meaning “supernatural being” is attested from c.1300 (see ghost); that of “essential principle of something” (in a non-theological sense, e.g. Spirit of St. Louis) is attested from 1690, common after 1800. Plural form spirits “volatile substance” is an alchemical idea, first attested 1610; sense narrowed to “strong alcoholic liquor” by 1678. This also is the sense in spirit level (1768).
For me, spiritual is just a code word for religious people who don’t want to admit to being religious.
bingo
I don’t believe in ghosts or new age woo, but I’d like to reclaim the word “spirituality” for existential reasons.
We look around and see a world that is no mere objective fact, but an existence that actually *hurts*, that we are each here experiencing a value-laden world that seems to evade objectification. Should we not have a word for that “breath” of significance that seems to pervade every slightest sensation?
Agreed. I refuse to relinquish this word to the religious or the supernatural. To do so is admitting to a shallow level of atheism or materialism. I ascribe a spiritual experience to something I feel very deeply, may have a loose framework of easily tangible, rational possibilities as partial, half-explanations for, but defer to the humility that I think is required when acknowledging the demonstrated limits of the human mind to process comprehensively.
A dictionary definition would have to split spirituality into numbers. For me, I’d start with: 1) Qualities pertaining to emotion, as humans are ‘spiritual creatures’ insofar as they are ‘spirited into action’ through emotional stimuli. In this, spirituality carries an implied irrationality, since our Amygdala responds first with fear and anger unless given the patient timing to pass matters on to the rational hypothalamus. 2) Qualities pertaining to imagined constructs of a causally contradictory “supernatural” dimension. In lie detection, the human mind evolved to guard vulnerability, then read tells to detect fraud, then convince the conscious of one’s own lies to better hide tells, then read in between what the subconscious is still telling, etc. Since “supernatural” things are ascribed unknowable qualities, to dodge scientific tests of falsifiability, it is used to excuse false claims of knowing things without knowable natures. See “caveman causality.”
Have to go along with the two definition approach. On the one hand spirituality refers to the metaphysical unseen stuff from which religions are made. On the other hand, when nontheists use the word in a positive way they are usually referring to the sublime.
I avoid using the word spiritual because it is so ambiguous. In particular, it may include belief in the supernatural or not. Most of the territory covered by the word spiritual with which i could agree can be covered more precisely by other words, such as emotional.
To me it’s one of those words with no meaning. It is used totally differently, to refer to different things, by different people who then can’t really define what they mean by it.
It is also used to look down on rationalists (like folk on here) who “lack a spiritual dimension”. That really pisses me off.
I think ultimately spirituality doesn’t refer specifically to a supernatural being or event, but it refers to something in yourself. Spirituality is about a journey and search in the metaphorical and symbolic sense. Spirituality is about questioning and wondering and trying to figure out the questions and never getting the answers. Its about those things that just a couple steps past what science and math can answer and make life worth living for. Science just tells you how things work and what they are made out of, it doesn’t tell you what “they are”. There are a lot of atheists I know who I would call spiritual but they run away from that label because of its associations with religion.
“Its about those things that just a couple steps past what science and math can answer and make life worth living for”
Great example, you made my point for me!!
I’m not trying to knock down rationalists or science, but I just feel that there are things science can’t answer or there are thoughts that must accompany science. For example, the recent announcement of the creation of the first synthetic cell. How it was created and what went into to make it happen is science. But the conversations happening around it about morality, what the limits of its use should be, and the changing perspective of what life is, I feel like that’s a spiritual practice, but most people just call it by other names. But that’s just my understanding of the concept, its different for everyone.
This is the dilemma of literature. We have so many feelings yet struggle to find words for them of which others will understand the meaning. “Spiritual” is one of those catch-alls that we hope has a broad enough definition that others will perhaps get some small sense of what we mean.
One of those words, that entails a different meaning for every individual – so I don’t even try to come up with a “translation”.
However my internal translation tool suggests “Hot Air, BS and ‘I need to say something meaningful!’ ” in many encounters with this word.
This.
Spiritual is a descriptor with a lot of meaninings because it refers to a noun that has a lot of different aspects: spirit. I think considering the different things that people mean by “spirit” might clarify the former.
One’s spirit, as a concept, refers to some kind of vital essence. It can refer to both to the mind, and the interface of the mind and the body; it’s the power that animates your physical substance. So a spiritual experience is anything that invigorates one’s intellect and perceptions.
There’s also the slightly trite idea that someone’s spirit is something separate from their physical form; it becomes the vehicle for supernatural abilities, it’s the part of you that survives death, it’s the part of you that becomes a ghost.
There’s another meaning for “spiritual” which kind of reflects the idea that the spirit doesn’t really exist, which is to explain what might be described as a “transcendant” experience, something that appears to be more than the sum of it’s parts.
(Just so we’re clear, I don’t believe in a “spirit”, but I recognise it as a semantic concept)
beautifully and rationally stated
“They interviewed some participants in a marathon that ran through the heart of one of the hottest places on earth.” — I’m actually reading about that ultramarathon (among others) in the book Born To Run. I highly recommend it.
What does spiritual mean to me? Well, for a few years I shied away from that word — mostly immediately after I left church. I associated it inextricably with religion, and assumed you couldn’t be spiritual without some sort of belief in god.
I no longer feel that to be the case. In a sense, freedom from religion and religious structures has made me able to embrace spirituality in my own life.
I don’t believe in an afterlife, in god or heaven or hell. I don’t believe there is anything after this life — so our acts and how we treat our fellow man on this earth matter all the more, because that is the mark the average human will leave behind. A memory of their actions, an impression on their family and friends.
As such, I’ve become more aware of certain flaws in my personality — things like speaking too quickly, too judgmentally. Not being forgiving enough — not willing to entertain the idea that the other party may have a valid reason (within their life) for their views. Sometimes I get heated and say unkind things — meaning the essence of what I said, but not thinking about how I phrased it.
Accepting my flaws, acknowledging them and continually pushing myself to work on them has made me a more spiritual person. I feel more connected with my fellow man, because when I find myself getting angry or irritated, I try to take a step back and truly consider their lives and what circumstances brought them to where they are. I may not like or even respect their viewpoints, but if I can try to find goodness in them and treat them with the respect I’d like to be treated with, then I’ve made my world a little better.
I find a spirituality, a certain peace and wonder of mind, when I read and research scientific articles — specifically those on brain chemistry or space. Both of these subjects are endlessly fascinating, with new information being discovered every day. It is a humbling and awe-inspiring thing to realize how little we know, yet witness that incredible indomitableness of spirit that pushes us to ever-further heights of inquiry.
I suppose spirituality is, to me, coming face-to-face with flaws (in myself and mankind), and accepting and loving despite them. It is coming up against the realization that we know very little, and much of what we’ve learned is lost to time — but accepting and embracing the challenge to gain knowledge nonetheless. It is the never-ending desire to learn, the moment when you understand something or someone so fully that you can detach yourself from the emotions and simply accept it for what it is before moving on to reassess and re-evaluate.
Spirituality is no doubt an ambiguous word, its meaning changing from one persons perspective to the other. To discuss the word by definition would lead inevitably back to personal representations. Therefore I would judge this as more a philosophical discussion instead of a logical one on the premise that it is entirely possible to have polar opposites in opinion. EG some say spirituality has no meaning, some say its “Harmony’s” doppelganger. Because of its ambiguity and sudden irrelevance to discussions of logistic basis I would attempt to reframe from using the word, but if I had to use it in context I would say that Spirituality is the cognitive mention of place within the vast system of the universe. I can feel very “Humble, satisfied, awed, harmonic, spiritual” about how totally insignificant I am in the great cogs of the cosmos and that when I die my carbon and nutrients will become grass for bunny food and feel like I’ve made a pretty accurate depiction of my definition of spirituality
1. Spiritual involves overly touchy-feely woo.
2. Copout for those trying to be religious non-religious.
Spirituality. Oh please.
I LOATHE the word. People are such unapologetic navel-gazers nowadays. They are the centre of the cosmos, and one with the world.
“Spritiuality”. It is such a new age-y term, given serious weight and importance by those who have bought it. Much like listening to religious whackjobs, we’re supposed to nod solemnly when someone speaks about being “spiritual”.
Although we all love and appreciate the smell of clothes drying on the line, the company of friends around the dinner table, and other things that give us butterflies, it doesn’t friggin’ make us “spiritual”.
And, yes — it can be a sort of new age placeholder for “religious”.
Spirituality evokes New Age woo to me as well. One with the universe and all that rot.
“Spiritual” got me dates!
When I was single, putting “atheist” on the match.com web site was almost the kiss of death. It’s amazing how many women won’t consider that — even though when the met me they thought I was a pretty good guy. I changed it to “spiritual but not religious” and had much better luck.
So to me, the word “spiritual” meant I could get dates, but not be a liar. It can mean anything I like!
Spirituality is also monkey($) making business besides.
I disagree with overly harsh criticisms of the word or even of the usage of spiritual. I think “spiritual” has a very clear set of connotations and very appropriate uses.
Spiritual seems to be the intersection of internal state (thought/emotion/feeling) with a benign ignorance. All of the words and adjectives that get across the “woo” connotation of spiritual (as opposed to the “spiritual” = “religious faith” connotation, as in the Ayatollah is Iran’s spiritual leader) seem basically to deal with have a huge upwelling of emotion that lacks satisfactory explanation.
So, I propose that when people talk about “spirituality” in the future, you might consider pointing out the relationship between “spiritual” / “numinous” etc. with “ignorance”. I think it rather fits.
In very important respects, Spiritual = Ignorance. Not that there is anything wrong with ignorance. It can often be corrected by education. And indeed scientists are driven by curiosity born of ignorance.
It is one of those religion words that has no real concrete meaning. To me it is so nebulous that it has no meaning whatsoever. Literal meaning would be “having features like a spirit” but this leaves you with defining what a spirit is.
Spirituality means that nice, warm fuzzy feeling you get when you consider nice things :-)
It may not be obvious for most people but there is a “school” of thought that recognizes the fact that things “spiritual” can NOT be conveyed in any language. A simple thing like the amount of love you feel for your children or lover can not be described to any degree of success by language. Spiritual is just a word, which packs a punch, that can not be proven or disproven to exist. Love is spiritual and sadly so is hatred. But none the less it is still just a word!
I presume the “spiritual” rewards the doctor was talking about was to be drinks at the nearest bar during happy hour. It’s the only spiritual reward I can think of unless he might be indicating a movement of the bowels after such a long run. Yup….booze and sh*t…..how spiritual!