Caliope on "spirituality" and "the soul"

[Caliope]

Originally Posted by The Irreverent Mr Black

Hi, Caliope.

I am hoping you might have a reasonable mind (mine isn't set: I leave that for jelly, cement and custard, thanks!), and we might discuss things.

Any subject you'd like to talk about?

What about the soul and spirituality.

[Caliope]

Originally Posted by Protium

Welcome Caliope. Could you define these two words please?

"the innermost aspect of humans, that which is of greatest value in them, that by which they are most especially in God's image" Taken from the wiki, as the catholic definition of the soul.

And "spirituality" matters which pertain to said definition of the soul.

[Aldaron]

Originally Posted by Caliope

"the innermost aspect of humans, that which is of greatest value in them, that by which they are most especially in God's image" Taken from the wiki, as the catholic definition of the soul.

And "spirituality" matters which pertain to said definition of the soul.

That first definition's a bit of a non-definition, Caliope. "The innermost aspect" is very fluffy...what's innermost? To me, the innermost aspect of a human is pretty much the interior of the skeleton; everything else wraps around that.

What is of greatest value to me is the happiness of my wife and son.

And since I see no evidence for God, I don't see how any soul I need to take into account can fit your (or Wiki's) definition.

[Caliope]

Originally Posted by JaxsonBateman

Hey folks,

This has been confusing me for a while now. I think I know the answer, but would love contribution from other forum-goers.

Basically - why is it that in today's society of major scientific breakthroughs and unparalleled technological advancement that atheism is not the dominant belief of the world's people?

As far as I can tell, it's primarily due to religion being passed on through the generations. For example, a child becomes a christian because their parents are christian, and raised them as such. By the time they're mature enough to start understanding the science and logic of the world, they've already been indoctrinated with the idea that faith doesn't need science and logic, making it difficult for a lot of people to 'deprogram' themselves. At least, that's my theory on it, and fortunately more and more people are breaking away from what they've been raised to believe (at least, according to surveys on the number of atheists in Australia since 2000, and rising numbers).

Of course, there are other reasons as well, such as social acceptance (which is even more of a reason in countries with religious-based laws like Iran).

But anyway, are there other major contributors as to why atheism has yet to become the dominant 'belief' on Earth? Is the 'need' for people to feel like they have someone watching over them a bigger consideration than I'm giving credit to? Could people not being forced to consider and re-evaluate what they believe be another issue (for example, a young person may go through school and even uni without coming across many, if any situations which really make them think "what do I really believe", and just believe their childhood religion on auto-pilot)?

Thanks for any input!

Jax

The simple answer to why atheism is not the dominant global belief is because it is unreasonable.

Spirituality is natural to man and can be seen in every society that has ever existed.

The soul it the faculty of man that experiences God, but the atheist denies his soul and calls spirituality silly superstition.

Atheists are spiritually retarded by choice, they have disabled their highest faculty, to only believe in the tangible carnal things, things that they can see, touch and measure scientifically.

It's bad being physically blind and worse to be mentally blind, but absolutely tragic to be spiritually retarded like the poor atheist.

People pamper their bodies, and titillate their minds, but it is what is good for a mans soul that gives the greatest life and meaning to his existence.

Atheism just does not inspire the heart of man, it is a dead, cold, vacuum.

[Caliope]

Originally Posted by Aldaron

That first definition's a bit of a non-definition, Caliope. "The innermost aspect" is very fluffy...what's innermost? To me, the innermost aspect of a human is pretty much the interior of the skeleton; everything else wraps around that.

What is of greatest value to me is the happiness of my wife and son.

And since I see no evidence for God, I don't see how any soul I need to take into account can fit your (or Wiki's) definition.

What evidence do you need to believe in God?

And where have you looked for the evidence?

[Bolero]

Originally Posted by Caliope

"the innermost aspect of humans, that which is of greatest value in them, that by which they are most especially in God's image" Taken from the wiki, as the catholic definition of the soul.

And "spirituality" matters which pertain to said definition of the soul.

Unfortunately your (wiki's) definition of a "soul" is so broad and vague as to be meaningless. Doubly meaningless if you wish to inject an undefined "God" concept in there. "Innermost aspect", "that which is of greatest value", "in God's image" ... these are terms you need to elucidate, because if your definition of a "soul" relies on them, they are far too vague and nonsensical in their current form.

I look forward to your reasonable presentation of sound, concrete definitions.

[Bolero]

Originally Posted by Caliope

The simple answer to why atheism is not the dominant global belief is because it is unreasonable.

Spirituality is natural to man and can be seen in every society that has ever existed.

The soul it the faculty of man that experiences God, but the atheist denies his soul and calls spirituality silly superstition.

Atheists are spiritually retarded by choice, they have disabled their highest faculty, to only believe in the tangible carnal things, things that they can see, touch and measure scientifically.

It's bad being physically blind and worse to be mentally blind, but absolutely tragic to be spiritually retarded like the poor atheist.

People pamper their bodies, and titillate their minds, but it is what is good for a mans soul that gives the greatest life and meaning to his existence.

Atheism just does not inspire the heart of man, it is a dead, cold, vacuum.

I was going to address this, but then I realised there was nothing to address. It's just a series of unsupported assertions and patronising attacks.

Ho hum. Yes, yes, dead cold vacuum inside, here; best go kill myself.

[BlueDevil]

As others have pointed out your definition of 'soul' is so vague that it really has no value as a definition. Discussion of such a concept is meaninless if no one actually knows what it is that you are discussing.

Not only do you need to define soul but you also need to provide evidence for it's existence. It is pointless to believe in something for which there is NO evidence.

[Lord Blackadder]

Originally Posted by Caliope

What evidence do you need to believe in God?

And where have you looked for the evidence?

What is this "God" of which you speak?

As for evidence, no cherry picking please. If you claim that God created kittens and rainbows and unicorn farts, therefore evidence for existence, you must also accept that he created hurricanes, the Ebola virus and Robert Mugabe...


Sent from my iPhone using magic technology thingy application thingy.

[Centauri]

Originally Posted by Caliope

What evidence do you need to believe in God?

And where have you looked for the evidence?

Why don't you believe in Lord Krishna?

And where have you looked for evidence for Him?