Spiritual but not religious

Post Reply New Topic

Why do people who are spiritual but not religious get hassled so much? Atheists think they're atheists in denial or future atheists. Religious people assume they're interested in going to church. Most people just think they're crazy hippies.

Despite there being a practically endless variety of belief systems covering every conceivable corner of the spiritual/theological/metaphysical/etc. spectrum, people generally have a very black and white view of such things. To me, saying that someone can't be "spiritual but not religious" is like saying that someone can't be bisexual: they inexplicably either have to choose one or the other. I don't see what the big deal is.

what is your definition of spiritual?
it's such a vague term..

I agree that its pretty vague, it's hard to take any meaning from the term on its own so I think it is natural people will try to project their views onto you. I wouldn't call myself religious but wouldn't say I am an atheist either, I don't feel comfortable declaring authoritatively something unknowable and beyond me one way or another.

The phrase is so common it even has its own Wikipedia article.

Essentially, it means someone who subscribes to a certain spiritual philosophy but not to its attached system of organized religion. For example, I personally identify as a deist, in that I believe in God but I don't adhere to the dogma of any specific denomination as I largely reject the construct of man-made organized religion. Though you could call me "spiritual but not religious", it's not a term that I would use, mostly because it...well, it sounds pretentious.

Well, the problem is that spiritualists tend to have relatively little self-control:

http://www.jimrigby.org/spiritual-but-n ... religious/

Like it or not, but us atheists tend to be pretty good about keeping our noses clean:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyat ... -imagined/

Therefore, the reason you are getting flack "from both sides"--or however you want to view it--is simply that you are a troublesome bunch.

A fascinating topic and one that science is coming closer to explain in REAL LIFE.

IT'S A PERSONALITY ISSUE REALLY, as some folks operate more in an intuitive and instinctual FEELING WAY OF EXPERIENCING THE WORLD, and some folks operate in more of an analytical reasoning fact finding way of experiencing the world.

Interestingly, the folks who analyze their way through life often need an instruction manual, be it science or dogmatic religion to figure out how to get what they perceive as the best out of life.

And of course there is a spectrum of being per experience of life, that CAN go in either direction depending on the environment one is exposed to in life.

I am free, simple as that MAY BE, with relative free will and understand the Atheist language for GOD and the one that the dogmatic religious person has as one and same, OVERALL, as simply one who looks for guidelines in life, rather than looking inside through instinct, intuition and FEELING TO MAKE THE MOST OUT OF LIFE.

GENERALLY SPEAKING, THE FOLKS WHO USE INSTINCT, INTUITION AND FEELING to get the most out of life MAY CONSIDER THEMSELVES spiritual.

Generally speaking, the folks who use analysis and reason to get the most out of life ARE either Atheist SCIENCE leaning or Dogmatic fundamentalist religious leaning folks.

Some folks who use feeling have a hard time with reason and vice versa, but to truly KNOW BOTH WAYS OF EXPERIENCING LIFE AND TAKING THE BEST OF BOTH WAYS OF LIVING LIFE IS simply Wisdom.

I choose enlightenment AND AWAKENING WITH A totally open mind AKA WISDOM.

And that means simply seeing life with BOTH EYES OPEN, as metaphor for A FULL BRAIN WORKING AS SUCH FULLY AS POSSIBLE.

Wow, I've experienced the exact opposite, DevilKisses. I've never heard of anyone being harassed for being "spiritual but not religious"--in fact, it seems like the trendy thing to be. If anything, my peers regard me as being an oddball for being a committed member of my denomination!

Here's a study that reports that "spiritual but not religious" is the fastest growing religious category in America. http://www.pewforum.org/2012/10/09/nones-on-the-rise/

So, I tend to view religion from a functional/dysfunctional framework.

Religion is functional when it promotes basic ethics (don't kill, steal, lie, have sex with your friend's spouse, do be nice to your parents, etc.), and when it promotes empathy (charity, social justice, etc., (see Jesus & Pope Frank)).

Religion is dysfunctional when it promotes superstition (hostility to science and rational thought) and violence/intolerance (terrorism, discrimination toward women/gays, etc.).

To my mind, most mainstream religion like Catholicism, mainline protestantism, and moderate forms of Islam are functional. Fundamentalist Christianity, Islam, even Buddhism is dysfunctional...

And, I must admit, I see spirituality as needless, usually troublesome superstition--usually the bit that makes fundamentalism so bad...

Having said that, I am guilty of a bit of spirituality myself. It's mostly a byproduct of my upbringing in a mainline Christian home. I generally see God through a deistic lens. He's the creator of a universe that works according to scientifically knowable laws with NO DIVINE intervention. However, I cannot shake the feeling that he might, just might, intervene on a human level VERY occasionally...

As far as religion goes, my religion is the philosophy of Stoicism...

Contrary to popular belief, Stoicism IS NOT ABOUT REPRESSED EMOTIONS. Stoicism is about living a virtuous life in accord with reason.

The reason bit is pretty self-explanatory. The virtuous life part goes something like: a life in courageous pursuit of knowledge, justice, and temperance. And that stuff is really the most important to me... The spiritual stuff is just there, but trying to live a reasonable, virtuous life is what makes me better. And hopefully, helps me make the world better (as far as I can).

Marcus Aurelius sums it up best at the beginning of Meditations book two:

I'm pretty much an atheist, but I'm also somewhat spiritual.

I don't believe in deities or any kind of transcendence, but I see spirituality as those difficult to define qualities that add something to our lives, whether through meditation, inner reflection or even just the inner self that Jung describes.

I also think we have evolved to have this spiritual side, and that many animals have evolved to have it too, if less complex than ours.

Dreaming is perhaps the most tangible evidence of it. We don't know what dreaming is, though there are some theories. But it is evidence that there is a complexity which goes beyond merely functioning, beyond even our emotional involvement with the world. Our creativity and imagination is yet another evidence.

Human spirituality is so difficult to make a science of that people rush to conclude it has to be something soul-like, just as we once thought of disease as something akin to possession.

But even if our spirituality is only a function of our brains, that doesn't reduce its worth. Human spirituality, to me, is just as important to our well being as is our health. Meditation, reflection and mindful practices improve life quality in several ways.

I'm a non-spiritual, non-religious, agnostic atheist, and I had a really good conversation with my friend's brother earlier on, who is a non-denominational spiritualist. We talked about things like the nature of energy, the sentience of various living things, and the evolutionary origins of different animals. We actually agreed on a lot of points, though some of his beliefs were a bit far-fetched for me. We did learn a few things from each other however, and ultimately that makes me that bit more enlightened.