Can an atheist be spiritual?

[@jitteryjet7525]

In my opinion no one has defined Spirituality in any meaningful way or provided physical evidence for it, and Atheism is all about the physical evidence. I guess an Atheist can be Spiritual as Atheism only concerns itself with Deities, but there will be a conflict as the reasons for lacking a belief in Deities would also apply to Spirituality.

[@TheDiscourseCollective]

Yes, Atheism is all about reasoned evidence, but there are some things we know exist, but can't nail them down. Our conscious minds, and how they are influenced, is one such example. Here we must rely on results; if meditation makes me feel subjectively 'better', while science also tells us that it positively effects our brain chemistry, then it's work a go in my opinion.

[@josephcollins6033]

Glad to see a lesson on this. Seems that atheists are almost afraid to seek some kind of spirituality. Thanks for this!

[@TheDiscourseCollective]

You're welcome; I'm so glad you enjoyed it. Keep well and thanks for taking the time to comment.

[@josephcollins6033]

@@TheDiscourseCollective Absolutely!

[@sandersson2813]

Spiritualism in my opinion is just a meaningless word. People use it to try and view themselves as deeper than they are. It doesn't have a proper definition and as such is a useless thing to describe anything. Consciousness is not a mystery. It cannot exist without a brain and is a function of it. We know this when consciousness can be changed by brain injuries or people with split personalities.

[@TheDiscourseCollective]

Yeah, the term is a little wishy-washy; a bit nebulous. But I feel it does have use subjectively to describe experiences that defy definition any other way. The transcendental, the otherworldly, the oblique. I guess I'm trying to say it's OK for materialists / atheists to say "I don't know what I'm feeling but it has value to me". That might be though meditation or just changing your mindset. As regards consciousness, I feel you might be being a little hasty to claim we understand it. There is currently a strong theory in neuroscience suggesting that the subconscious has a full and functional conscious existence that is totally separate from your conscious brain. The two cannot directly communicate so the subconscious has to kind to try to 'nudge' your conscious mind in the right direction. Under this model, schizophrenia could be a breakdown in this process where to two people meld together too closely. Can you imagine that? A fully conscious second person in your brain with whom you can't communicate, but they have access to all your memories and thoughts and experiences, in far greater clarity, than your conscious mind? That's what I mean by "we don't understand it". Thanks for your input, it really helps move the discussion forward and I value your points very highly.

[@sandersson2813]

@@TheDiscourseCollective Have you ever seen a conscious or a mind exist without a brain? It has NEVER been observed and therefore there is no reason to think the two are in any way separate. It is demonstrably a function of a living brain and a sentient being. If something is unexplained, I think it is disingenuous to give it a name or some sort of mystical explanation. Just say "we don't know" . We have zero examples of anything outside the natural world, and if we don't understand something it doesn't mean it is other worldly, transcendental or anything like that, simply means we don't have an explanation. Giving something like that special treatment and considering it has an explanation that lies outside nature isn't being rational.