What is logic?

[Little Rik]

Is a pity that you do not know the difference between temporary happy and permanent happy.
If people would be permanent happy and in peace with themselves then they wouldn't go back to the same acts that previously made them happy for a short time of course.
To be permanent happy is ingrained in the human mind.
People will keep on looking and looking until they find permanent peace of mind.
There is no question about it.
People that say that they are happy as they are without engage in that exercise that lead to permanent
peace of mind such as the spirituality are fooling themselves.
I am not saying that they are lying.
They usually think in that way in good faith but deep within their consciousness say otherwise
and the evidence is that these people keep on looking and looking around and around for peace of mind.

Here is a small quiz-test that may help you to understand my point.

1) After struggling to buy your new car do you feel frustrated to see that you could have bought the same car a lot cheaper elsewhere?
2) Do you feel frustrated to see that a new model of car just came out with more features for the same price?
3) Do you feel frustrated to see that the grass in your neighbor garden is greener?
4) Suppose you are married.
When you see someone who look younger and more attractive than your partner do you feel like you
would rather make love with that person that look better?

If that doesn't apply to you then you are a super person.

I could go on and on with these test because physical-material-mental life always offer us something better.
In this way is next to impossible to find peace of mind.
Now tell me that you are happy as you are without engaging in spirituality.
In this case you are a super super super human being.
Good on you Ace.
You are a champion.
I would say a rarity.
Maybe you come from a different planet or universe or dimension.
You certainly are not from planet earth.  

See, I agree with your logic here but I see no need to call it 'spirituality' just psychology. Realising that everything is impermanent/transient, and therefore chasing it is ultimately pointless and will lead to inevitable loss (ie suffering), leads to one logical conclusion that attachment (to these impermanent things) is the cause of suffering, and therefore the solution that eliminating attachment, eliminates suffering. I just see that as a psychological theory that makes logical sense, but nowhere does it need to be called 'spiritual' for it to be put into practice in life. All it needs is mindfulness and awareness. So if I were to go into it fully, I don't ultimately see what difference would be between you and me... both striving for non-attachment but with you believing in an afterlife/reincarnation and me not. If that full state of non-attachment was reached, then if true, eternal life would just be a continuation of the state we had reached... which, being non-attachment, would be just a state of peace without want. So what I'm saying is if we got that far, there's not much difference between ceasing to exist and living on in a perpetual state of not giving a fuck about anything So basically ultimately I don't see what the notion of God offers to the equation or how it would make any practical difference even if it were true.

Your analysis badly miss something.
Psychology can only reach a certain point.
The mind is like an iceberg.
We can only see the above part.
If we want to see the part below the water we have to go under the water.
The mind is not all the same.
There is the conscious mind and the unconscious mind.
To understand the conscious mind is not a big deal but to see the unconscious mind it is.
Psychology is not the best tool to see below.
All psychology can do is to see the above part and guess what lie under in the unconscious mind
but guessing is not good enough that is why I wouldn't take for granted what psychology say.

To know what lie under in the unconscious mind a person must undertake a lot of hard work.
Is not so simple.
It takes practice and a lot of it.
Psychology doesn't undertake practice so there is no way that psychology will ever be able to understand the mind in full and here I mean the conscious and the unconscious mind.  

---

The pineal gland is the seat of the consciousness and when the consciousness is 100% pure you are God.

Ooh boy, can't wait to tell this to my Neurobiology professor when I go take the exam. /s

Rik, if all you're going to do is to throw out bald assertions without any proof to back them up, you're not going to have a fruitful conversation like... ever. Even outside of this forum. Go ahead, show me (a guy who's getting a Master's degree in Medical Biotechnology) HOW the pineal gland is the seat of consciousness. Come at me scrublord, I'm ripped.

And if you're interested, PM me in Italian. I'm honestly curious about what you actually think, and sometimes it just seems to me that half of the conversation is lost in translation.

Gee Luc I am so so so excited that you will become a great great expert in the brain activity.
Please Luc do me a favor.  
Ask your professor who decide to start the action.
The I the mind or the brain and if there is any difference between the I the mind and the brain.
I have been asking so many people  and no one could tell me for sure.
I am sure that your professor will know the answer.  
Please help LR to understand.