(November 30, 2009 at 5:59 pm)Purple Rabbit Wrote:(November 30, 2009 at 5:34 pm)theVOID Wrote: What the fuck is supposed to be spiritual about verified truth?Is somebody fucked? Where? Voluntarily?
My suggestion about verification/falsification was meant as a method to deal with the claim of enlightenment in a rational way. Do you think this is fair or is it possible that enlightenment may exists and still be unverifiable/unfalsifiable?
(November 30, 2009 at 5:34 pm)theVOID Wrote: Spiritual implies the spirit or soul, a completely unfounded concept.IMO, the word 'spiritual' is hijacked by religion and scrambled into a meaning with supernatural context. We, as proud atheists, should not allow this. ATHEISTS OF ALL NATIONS UNITE! Just joking there. The spiritual for me refers to cohesiveness and reverence for the natural world, but these words are not accurate enough to me. There is a french writer who has some interesting points on this (André Comte-Sponville).
What you described as 'spiritual' i call appreciation for reality - As for 'Enlightenment', it does not exist, it is the foolish idea that one can achieve some profound understanding of the universe which is quite frankly impossible given our current situation and impossible entirely in the sense that most people try to achieve it, they believe that it is from inner contemplation alone - in reality they are deluding themselves.
.
