Dan_LastName
Member
But if you substitute the word 'science' for each use of the words 'spiritual/religious' your logic still applies.
I agree with you here.
I have been experimenting with this model where beliefs are related to experiences, emotions, thoughts/cognition, and society/culture/history.
I tend to think that some folks slide around from spiritual/religious to atheistic (or from atheistic to spiritual/religious) based on that range of experiences.
I mentioned "logic and proof" because the post I was replying to mentioned it. I was trying to say that I think "logic and proof" aren't 100% effective in persuading people to change their minds on someting when the reasons people are clinging to a different position are more complex.So I think you are saying that we all want a belief system to cling to. That to me is illogical, and it often takes the passage of time to discover this. Everything is a belief system and logic and proof are no more near it than spirituality/religion.
We're never going to understand this ineffable thing unless we stop trying to find, define or prove it, and begin to use our intuition as a means of reading its truths.
I like your idea that maybe life, the universe, and everything are "ineffable". I tend to think that there's no one system or set of ideas that will ever define or prove it. I tend to think that all of the different "frames of mind" we find ourselves in are important to the question. It seems like any particular "frame of mind" I'm in can only capture a narrow chunk of the whole.
I'm not sure if I get what you mean?Emotional manifestations show where our beliefs, needs and desires lie. They should be a gateway to understanding, not a reason for choosing/reverting to another belief system.
The attention to conflicting external opposites keeps us distracted from what is found within.
Or perhaps people enjoy 'being sheep'