What is Rational Spirituality ?
Read the article this discussion is about
- Franc28
- RichardSpeaks
- Franc28
- QuantumVista
- QuantumVista
- RichardSpeaks
- Franc28
- Franc28
- QuantumVista
- Evastein
This archived discussion is "read only".
For the corresponding "live" discussions, post in the active topic forum here.
« Previous 1 2 Next »
» Franc28 - Re: some thoughts on the subject
In response to message posted by QuantumVista:"I find fascination with the structure of the integration. How do the boxes nest? Is there ever any extra room? Do all of the boxes touch each other? If you take some out, do the others remain still or do they move?"
Well, part of that is simply relative to your own analogy, I suppose. That's not really what's important, but rather how the concepts themselves work.
"That fascination has led me to understand Being/Existence as the conveyance of information about Being/Existence for the creation, assesment, and continuance of Being/Existence. To what end? Don't know."
Why do you need to look for an end ? You are imposing your own mental activity and structure on Existence. A rock does not care for the conveyance of information about itself or anything else, it simply is. Our self-awareness and capacity to ask these questions are important, but it doesn't mean that they are somehow universal. In fact, your awareness is completely unimportant.
"Once information is assessed, the brain causes consciousness to direct action of Being to create, assess, or maintain. Thus the loop completes."
The "brain" does not cause "consciousness" to do anything, the consciousness is a part of the brain.
Your assumptions about the thinking process seem to be motivated by the Cartesian Theater fallacy. There is no special part of "us" that does the "directing" - and thus no structured path as you seem to posit. I would invite you to read more on the particular subject of consciousness, because this centrist perspective has been completely wiped out by neurology and experiments on the mind.
-- posted by Franc28
» RichardSpeaks - Rational Spirituality
Hi--I am the CE for New Thought (Religion/Sprituality). I always find logical and rational approaches to spirituality interesting. The traditional Christian will tell you that, once you eliminate Satan, all you have left is logic. And of course, logic can't 'save' you. In New Thought, we, too, have eliminated the devil and are left with One Power, not two. Since we believe in only one power, anything is possible, since everything is, as we say, Spirit Expressing. You call it Existence.
The only challenge I find with your approach is that it seems to be missing heart. Any comments?
Thanks, and I plan to continue reading your work.
Rev. Richard
-- posted by RichardSpeaks
» Franc28 - Re: Rational Spirituality
In response to message posted by RichardSpeaks:"The only challenge I find with your approach is that it seems to be missing heart. Any comments?"
Not sure what you mean about that. Perhaps you refer to the Christian belief that love is somehow universal (although it is not preached nor practiced, of course).
The universe, on the other hand, is indifferent and pitiless. This may seem depressing, but also affirms man's capacity to reason, guide his own destiny and evolve.
Love is a concrete emotion which is actualized in the here and now, and becomes meaningful by that fact - the notion of universal love is not meaningful.
-- posted by Franc28
» QuantumVista - Re: Re: some thoughts on the subject
In response to message posted by Franc28:Why do you need to look for an end?
I'm not looking for an end, I presumed someone might ask the question, and thought to admit I don't know, maybe better stated as, "A goal for this process is irrelevant."
You are imposing your own mental activity and structure on Existence.
No, I am integrating the mental activity of human Being into Existence.
A rock does not care for the conveyance of information about itself or anything else, it simply is.
It simply is, because consciousness assesses it's Being, gleans meaning from that Being, and completes the loop. the conclusion that the rock does not care, is a conscious application of meaning onto Being. The falling tree in the woods makes no sound. Same thing. It just so happens that the brain is part of the equation. There is probably other being which functions similarly to the brain, maybe better.
Our self-awareness and capacity to ask these questions are important, but it doesn't mean that they are somehow universal.
But the structure of their integration in the totality IS important.
In fact, your awareness is completely unimportant.
Yes, that's a given. There is NOTHING important about any particular "awareness" But there is significance in the consciousness/Being pair which begets awareness. I hold that consciousness, is Not just a function of the brain but the brain is a "collector" of it, if you will. Yes, awareness is Subjective, but also part of the totality, thus important. Dare I say Universally significant.
"Once information is assessed, the brain causes consciousness to direct action of Being to create, assess, or maintain. Thus the loop completes." The "brain" does not cause "consciousness" to do anything, the consciousness is a part of the brain.
I would have to be convinced of that.
Your assumptions about the thinking process seem to be motivated by the Cartesian Theater fallacy. There is no special part of "us" that does the "directing" ... this centrist perspective has been completely wiped out by neurology and experiments on the mind.
I am about as centrist as Pluto is habitable by Investment bankers. I see the integrations of Existence as "fully-meshed" and while not purposefully, each "coagulation" of being does something, moves through space-time in some manner and integrates with everything else in some manner. Our thought processes are a by-product of the structure of formation, a function of our being. Consciousness is Being, but it's greater/higher/different than the brain's state of being. Despite that, the brain can control the consciousness it posesses. As a glass jar can hold a gas, as a tube can channel water, as a light bulb can convert electronic motion into Photonic motion.
-- posted by QuantumVista
» QuantumVista - Re: Re: Rational Spirituality
In response to message posted by Franc28:But love must be integrated into Existence. How? As a function of our non-unique ability to perceive, create, assess, and maintain. It is a function of the consciousness that our "brain" collects, it is also Being, with applied meaning, derived from assessment by Being.
-- posted by QuantumVista
» RichardSpeaks - Re: Re: Rational Spirituality
"Love is a concrete emotion..."I disagree. Love is not an emotion. It is a choice. Liking may be an emotion; warm fuzzies may be emotion; love is a choice. It is in the action, not the feeling, that love is made manifest. I agree that if we see 'universal love' as some kind of emotion, then of course it is meaningless. We humans give everything its meaning, even the universe itself. But as for the universe being pitiless, in the strictest sense, perhaps, but the universe operates according to principle, to law. If you work with, rather than against, those principles, the universe can seem like a very accommodating place. Work against them and the universe is cold and uncaring, indeed. Love is what we, as choosing humans, introduce into a universe of law. As we act in accordance with that choice, the world becomes a better place. Unfortunately, you're right to say that religion is not the place to find that love. Only in the heart of the individual. The truly great spiritual leaders, both historic and contemporary, have almost to a person been condemned at worst and ignored at best by mainstream Western religion. New Thought seeks to instill the practice of love in its adherents. And it is the individual who must decide to make love a way of life. Any good feelings that come with it are just that: feelings. A bonus perhaps, nothing more.
You say we are not special. But a species who could discover its own unspecialness is unique indeed, at least in this world. A species who can discuss the merits or lack thereof of its own existence might just be a fluke in the universe. Maybe not special, but nifty nonetheless.
-- posted by RichardSpeaks
» Franc28 - Re: Re: Re: some thoughts on the subject
In response to message posted by QuantumVista:"It simply is, because consciousness assesses it's Being, gleans meaning from that Being, and completes the loop. the conclusion that the rock does not care, is a conscious application of meaning onto Being."
But that's not what we're talking about. We are discussing the rock itself, not our perception of it.
-- posted by Franc28
» Franc28 - Re: Re: Re: Rational Spirituality
In response to message posted by RichardSpeaks:"I disagree. Love is not an emotion. It is a choice."
I do not understand what this means. Do you not understand what we mean by "love" ?
"Liking may be an emotion; warm fuzzies may be emotion; love is a choice. It is in the action, not the feeling, that love is made manifest."
I agree. But making an emotion manifest is not the emotion itself.
"But as for the universe being pitiless, in the strictest sense, perhaps, but the universe operates according to principle, to law."
That's what I mean. The universe, of course, is not human. Our emotions are purely human in nature.
"If you work with, rather than against, those principles, the universe can seem like a very accommodating place. Work against them and the universe is cold and uncaring, indeed."
Absolutely. But that is more related to the notion of "sense of life". That is, how we see ourselves in reality, rather than about reality itself.
"You say we are not special. But a species who could discover its own unspecialness is unique indeed, at least in this world."
In that sense, yes. But our consciousness is not special in nature. The only thing that differentiates us is a bigger brain. Not to knock it down, of course - if we're talking at a level of being able to do and think and so on, then yes, it is a special and precious ability.
-- posted by Franc28
» QuantumVista - so anyway...
In response to message posted by Franc28:Could you clarify for us "it seems to be missing heart," Richard? For the record, embracing the chaos that an understanding of spirituality on its own terms, requires, show a great deal of "heart" indeed. Or should I say intestinal fortitude. : )
-- posted by QuantumVista
« Previous 1 2 Next »
Please follow the guidelines set forth in the Suite101 Posting Etiquette when adding to the discussion.