They are different.

Mohan.C · **They are different. -** 04-28-2006, 10:14 AM

This post is to create some awareness,
Please do not combine spirituality and science nor coin new words for combining it.
Spirituality and science or philosophy(they are both the same) are two different paths to understand the reality. If you're going to mix it up. It will just give utter nonsense.
Spirituality can explain some things and science can explain some. But both of them are capable of themselves to understand reality on their own.
Please understand this subtle fact and work to go near the TOE.

Guille · 04-28-2006, 10:20 AM

I agree, spirituality must be the further away from science and form philosophy as possible. But I believe that spirituality won't understand anything ever, that's the difference between us. You said that 'science and philosophy are just the same' and I didn't believe what you said. I mean, science and philosophy are very different, maybe what you meant is that their relationship to spirituality/religion/mythology is the same (null)? Because if not, you then agree with Schopenhauer's philosophy? (he once wrote "
Philosophy... is a science, and as such has no articles of faith; accordingly, in it nothing can be assumed as existing except what is either positively given empirically, or demonstrated through indubitable conclusions.", do you agree?).

Mohan.C · 04-28-2006, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by <<<GUILLE>>>

I agree, spirituality must be the further away from science and form philosophy as possible. But I believe that spirituality won't understand anything ever, that's the difference between us. You said that 'science and philosophy are just the same' and I didn't believe what you said. I mean, science and philosophy are very different, maybe what you meant is that their relationship to spirituality/religion/mythology is the same (null)? Because if not, you then agree with Schopenhauer's philosophy? (he once wrote "
Philosophy... is a science, and as such has no articles of faith; accordingly, in it nothing can be assumed as existing except what is either positively given empirically, or demonstrated through indubitable conclusions.", do you agree?).

Yep, I do agree, I can edit it now(the options still there) But I don't think I will do that. I should not have talked of philosophy. I haven't read anything of philosophy.
But spirituality does understand some thing. Like mkirkpatrick is developing his idea. Some times it makes sense in society but not in reality no.
How exactly are society and reality different?

AntonioLao · **distinctive bases -** 04-28-2006, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mohan.C

Spirituality and science or philosophy

One is based on faith (certainty) and the other is based on doubts (uncertainty).

Guille · 04-28-2006, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AntonioLao

One is based on faith (certainty) and the other is based on doubts (uncertainty).

Very true. And then within uncertainty, the role of philosophy is to mark the way which is the best within uncertainty, and the role of science is to go through it. Philosophy puts the questions and science answers them, but philosophy is not only the preparatorium for science; it also is the guide of science whiles this one answers the questions. We can also say that science is empirical and philosophy is rational. Russell said that "Science is what we know and philosophy is what we don't know".

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mohan.C

Yep, I do agree, I can edit it now(the options still there) But I don't think I will do that. I should not have talked of philosophy. I haven't read anything of philosophy.
But spirituality does understand some thing. Like mkirkpatrick is developing his idea. Some times it makes sense in society but not in reality no.
How exactly are society and reality different?

Philosophy is not only read; it is mainly done. You have done philosophy (and therefore, you are a philosopher) when you asked the question at the bottom of your post. Spirituality does not understand anything, for understanding requiers a sort of rational thinking, and rationality is based on uncertainty, and as Antonio said, spirituality is certainty. Also, I believe spirituality, or any thought about god cannot be communicated, cannot be transmitted, it is part of our inner essence. So it is not a social thing (and this is why I believe any religion which adopts a spiritual form, like Buddhism, is falsifying the meaning of both realigion and spirituality), but an anthropological thing (of the individual, of the mind in question).

AntonioLao · **public prayers -** 04-28-2006, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GUILLE

So it is not a social thing

Therefore prayers as direct personal communication with the almighty is best done privately instead of publicly as in churches, synagogues, or mosques.

Guille · 04-28-2006, 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AntonioLao

Therefore prayers as direct personal communication with the almighty is best done privately instead of publicly as in churches, synagogues, or mosques.

Exactly. Anyway, pure spirituality would not need of pre-learned prayers, or prayers at all. There are a series of complications about this, which are the reason why I believe spirituality leads to nowhere just as mythology or religion (or politics).

AntonioLao · **what will be will be -** 04-28-2006, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GUILLE

spirituality leads to nowhere just as mythology or religion (or politics).

I can't see the spiritual connection of politics? My personal communication with the all seeing eye (or eyes?) is asking for guidance and ability to understand the future.

Guille · 04-28-2006, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AntonioLao

I can't see the spiritual connection of politics? My personal communication with the all seeing eye (or eyes?) is asking for guidance and ability to understand the future.

The thing is that spirituality doesn't seem to be able to disconnect from the basic rules of god. I mean, yes, it takes god as relative and sbujective to each mind and individual, but it is still something absolute. And contains properties (not to be misinterpreted as atributes, this last is those like omnipresent, omniscient... but the atributes are intrisic to it's nature, not in relation to things) which mantains god as a subversive thing, to which people find inferior, instead of by the side of god. If god doesn't stop being on top, it will keep leading to nowhere. And I just said politics because it also leads to nowhere.

AntonioLao · **singularity -** 04-28-2006, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GUILLE

but it is still something absolute.

absolute as that of a singularity? The One as '0'? Duality is always plurality 1/infinity, hence not absolute but relative to each other. The One is 1 if and only if it is related to infinity. But 0 has nothing to relate to except another zero or as many 0's. But there is only one 1 and one infinity.