It needs a theory of reality, and not of universe ~ even with consciousness added. whatever one adds and that nought can be taken away [everything exists in some sense, even colour qualia etc], we surely always need that to round up to a whole. if we begin with categorical differences, then naturally that’s a dualism. …don’t get why that isn’t immediate lol [to physicists].
consciousness might yet be a part of physical existence, we would just have to adapt the concept ‘physical’ to refer to all existent entities ~ which would initially include every aspect of consciousness. I say initially because one would also need the categorical difference of ‘mind’ as a function in physics, …can’t see that happening in a hurry.
That for me would be more of a psychological problem for those kinds of individual.
My experience is more with those on the other side of the coin. They refuse to question and doubt “anything” or make distinctions because then they might have to sacrifice comfort and security.
I try to accept reality as it is and not let any subjective interpretation of it up
on my part determine how it should be since that does not actually make it so
That is like saying, "Everyone could just be scientific. There is no need to have organized science".
Or, “Everyone could just govern themselves. There is no need to have an organized government”.
How are YOU defining “reality as it is” here? Proven physical facts?
If so, aside from those facts, how do you go about trying to discover more about reality, without some kind of subjective interpretation? Or do you?
No it isn’t because being spiritual is based on subjective feelings and or connection to life and universe. What does government or science have to do with that?
Science is not meant to be or even the same as religion, it isn’t all faith or even supposed to be about it. Government is for order, not dictating peoples subjective thoughts, ideas and beliefs.
Mags : if you not believe in God then you are atheist even if you dispense with the
label and prefer to describe yourself as something else instead [ such as spiritual ]
You might be considered a pagan, in tune with nature and your own nature.
Even a pagan though can be religious in the sense of being bound up by certain rituals or behaviors or beliefs pertaining to your paganism.
“Religious” doesn’t necessarily have to mean having to do with god.
A pagan can be just as religious and spiritual, perhaps even more so depending on the INDIVIDUAL as a catholic or any christian who follows their path by going to church, praying, et cetera ~~~ by complying to certain behaviors which draw out the spirit of their nature freeing them and adding to their own sense of deep self and worship, no matter what is being worshipped or reverenced…but not usually the Self itself being worshipped but something outward which resonates within.
Even scientists themselves are religious in their searches and experiments for knowledge, et cetera. They are bound up by these things, held fast by them.
That’s my perspective.
No confusion, as I know I don’t believe in a god but in the nature that resides in each of us… it is a personal choice on how we each want to use that nature during our lifetime.
Why do I have to be labelled? why doesn’t being spiritual just suffice?
