New spirituality?

[seatea]

I find that in the scientific world, most leading-edge anthropologists, archaeologists and Biologists live counter-evolutionary in their practical lives. Very few procreate - the essence and instinctual demand of the organism for the survival and evolution of the species - and make scientific jumps based on a philosophical disposition. Again, the fact that so few are well-rounded individuals able to properly care for offspring and a marriage relationship causes me to be dubious of the premise which is espoused.

Not doubt you have reams of evidence to back this claim up...

 

[Honestnathaniel]

Most of those things you mention are not new in the slightest but we have begun to see an increase in watered down versions of them in 'respectable' western society (whereas in earlier decades such as the 60s & 70s these ideas were found almost exclusively in counter-cultural circles).

I do touch on that in the op.

 

[tkotom]

You can see the problem of these pseudo-religious beliefs right in your description of them. Most people take a very lazy approach to them, and don't gain more than a surface understanding of what they are and what they're rooted in. As someone else said, it's hip. And hip is just another word for lazy and lacking creativity.

There are 7 billion people on the planet now, there didn't use to be, so sure, there are more suckers and lazy people than there used to be. And it's easier to disseminate any information today versus even ten years ago, let alone 30 or 40 years ago. But I think you're trying to say that more suckers and better information sharing someone lends validity to the subject matter, and that just isn't the case.

A good thing to quote is "the plural of anecdotes is not evidence"

 

[PhantomNugget**]

Interesting point of view. By that logic though, praying to a higher power could be considered dangerous as could the catholic process of intaking the "body and blood of christ". Both of those processes theoretically open you up for other energies.

But in Christianity you WANT to invite the Holy Spirit into you, or into your life. Imo that's the "good" voice in your head that guides you to make good decisions, or to show kindness to people, etc. And that feeling when you KNOW you've just done something good, that's the Holy Spirit as well. When Jesus left the Earth, then the Holy Spirit came here, to guide us. Before then, the Holy Spirit wasn't here. A lot of people don't realize that.

All these other things like wicca, Scientology, reiki, etc. are opening you up for "bad" energies, or spirits. And a lot of them seem harmless at first, or even good. And some of them can seemingly do some amazing things....that's the hook. But research it and you'll see that they're not good in the long run, and a lot of people end up messed up from it.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[mesomorph]

But in Christianity you WANT to invite the Holy Spirit into you, or into your life. Imo that's the "good" voice in your head that guides you to make good decisions, or to show kindness to people, etc. And that feeling when you KNOW you've just done something good, that's the Holy Spirit as well. When Jesus left the Earth, then the Holy Spirit came here, to guide us. Before then, the Holy Spirit wasn't here. A lot of people don't realize that.

All these other things like wicca, Scientology, reiki, etc. are opening you up for "bad" energies, or spirits. And a lot of them seem harmless at first, or even good. And some of them can seemingly do some amazing things....that's the hook. But research it and you'll see that they're not good in the long run, and a lot of people end up messed up from it.

Just my 2 cents.

'This horseshit is bad for you, my brand of horseshit is good for you. Take my word for it.'

 

[Honestnathaniel]

But in Christianity you WANT to invite the Holy Spirit into you, or into your life. Imo that's the "good" voice in your head that guides you to make good decisions, or to show kindness to people, etc. And that feeling when you KNOW you've just done something good, that's the Holy Spirit as well. When Jesus left the Earth, then the Holy Spirit came here, to guide us. Before then, the Holy Spirit wasn't here. A lot of people don't realize that.

All these other things like wicca, Scientology, reiki, etc. are opening you up for "bad" energies, or spirits. And a lot of them seem harmless at first, or even good. And some of them can seemingly do some amazing things....that's the hook. But research it and you'll see that they're not good in the long run, and a lot of people end up messed up from it.

Just my 2 cents.

But how do you know that "the holy spirit" is actually a positive thing and not some "demon"which is leading you to the perils of narrow belief and lack of intellectual/scientific pursuit?

 

[seatea]

But in Christianity you WANT to invite the Holy Spirit into you, or into your life. Imo that's the "good" voice in your head that guides you to make good decisions, or to show kindness to people, etc. And that feeling when you KNOW you've just done something good, that's the Holy Spirit as well. When Jesus left the Earth, then the Holy Spirit came here, to guide us. Before then, the Holy Spirit wasn't here. A lot of people don't realize that.

Then how do you explain all the bad things done by Christians?

 

[Honestnathaniel]

Then how do you explain all the bad thinks done by Christians?

Also if they holy spirit wasnt there before Jesus, that says alot about God if he chose to ignore all the millions who came before him.

 

[Rvd Slmr]

An open mind is vital in all aspects of life. Its true that these ideas consistently fail when the scientific method is applied, but I find some of them fascinating nonetheless and I do believe the fact that science is expanding to even consider them worthy of trial to be interesting in its own right.

For a scientific mind everything is worth a trial, that doesn't mean the scientific world is taking the New-Age related stuff more seriously. Some people just randomly claim that crystals and runes have power with absolutely nothing to back that up, they are just selling a product.

 

[tkotom]

Watched the Zeitgeist movie, and I think what it showed me, is that people are quick to connect dots that don't necessitate connecting. Like its so assumed that because se prior peoples and societies had Christlike deities with similar origins, that this automatically nullifies Christianity. Where in fact throughout the Bible, you have various "types" of Christs that preceded the antitype. For instance the prophecy, "Out of Egypt I have called my son" originally refered to Judah and the nation of Israel. Both Joseph and David are considered "types" of Christs. Furthermore, the prophecy that the woman in travail for 30 years refered to, was a very seemingly-obscure reference to the coming Christ (I believe in Malachi, saying, "the Son will come with healing in his wings." The wings refered to the corner tassels that were common in robes in those days. The woman believed that if she would only touch one of them she would be healed - and was instantly (according to the Biblical account).

I find that in the scientific world, most leading-edge anthropologists, archaeologists and Biologists live counter-evolutionary in their practical lives. Very few procreate - the essence and instinctual demand of the organism for the survival and evolution of the species - and make scientific jumps based on a philosophical disposition. Again, the fact that so few are well-rounded individuals able to properly care for offspring and a marriage relationship causes me to be dubious of the premise which is espoused.

A lot of broad sweeping claims here. Kind of laughable.

Then again I don't think anyone endorses a Darwinian approach to life. Regardless of how people lead their lives, that doesn't change the fact of evolution.

 

[Honestnathaniel]

For a scientific mind everything is worth a trial, that doesn't mean the scientific world is taking the New-Age related stuff more seriously. Some people just randomly claim that crystals and runes have power with absolutely nothing to back that up, they are just selling a product.

For alot of scientific minds throughout history there was alot of things not worth trial, at least not publicly. But I get your point.

 

[Deleted member 347815]

Lost me at "intellectual underground", self important hipster assholes.

 

[The Soothsayer]

I've been getting into Hinduism and Ashtanga yoga.

I'm a purebred Atheist, and I always will be, but I find some personal meaning in those things.

 

[dissolved]

Not doubt you have reams of evidence to back this claim up...

I took annthropology, archaeology and biology at a college level. I follow the sciences some and watch nature channels a lot. In my experience, most of the professors I've had and most of the teachers of science to the masses aren't the ones procreating and "in" long-lasting relationships. Most are headcases on a day to day level. The "learned" ones aren't doing what the survival and evolution of the species requires. Most educated, learned types (in society's eyes) are occupied by the frivolous (outside of their studies and teachings) and their own egos to be bothered with the mundane necessity of child-bearing and rearing. Funny, though all of my professors were in their 40s and 50s none had children.

 

[seatea]

Then again I don't think anyone endorses a Darwinian approach to life. Regardless of how people lead their lives, that doesn't change the fact of evolution.

This. Dawkins even goes out of way in 'The Selfish Gene' to argue that one of the benefits of being human is that we can rebel against our genes.

Darwin himself also never regarded his theory as something to base a life or a society on.

 

[Honestnathaniel]

I took annthropology, archaeology and biology at a college level. I follow the sciences some and watch nature channels a lot. In my experience, most of the professors I've had and most of the teachers of science to the masses aren't the ones procreating and "in" long-lasting relationships. Most are headcases on a day to day level. The "learned" ones aren't doing what the survival and evolution of the species requires. Most educated, learned types (in society's eyes) are occupied by the frivolous (outside of their studies and teachings) and their own egos to be bothered with the mundane necessity of child-bearing and rearing. Funny, though all of my professors were in their 40s and 50s none had children.

Both fortunately and unfortunately for humanity, people like those professors are in the extreme minority.

 

[tkotom]

This. Dawkins even goes out of way in 'The Selfish Gene' to argue that one of the benefits of being human is that we can rebel against our genes.

Darwin himself also never regarded his theory as something to base a life or a society on.

Yes a common misconception, perhaps deliberately so on the end of evolution deniers.

 

[seatea]

I took annthropology, archaeology and biology at a college level. I follow the sciences some and watch nature channels a lot.

Well I'm sold.

In my experience, most of the professors I've had and most of the teachers of science to the masses aren't the ones procreating and "in" long-lasting relationships. Most are headcases on a day to day level. The "learned" ones aren't doing what the survival and evolution of the species requires. Most educated, learned types (in society's eyes) are occupied by the frivolous (outside of their studies and teachings) and their own egos to be bothered with the mundane necessity of child-bearing and rearing. Funny, though all of my professors were in their 40s and 50s none had children.

Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal.

I will concede that education level of a population (especially of women) does affect birth rates.

 

[dissolved]

A lot of broad sweeping claims here. Kind of laughable.

Then again I don't think anyone endorses a Darwinian approach to life. Regardless of how people lead their lives, that doesn't change the fact of evolution.

In not sure that any theory or idea is outright laughable. Christopher Columbus in his journal related the significance of the Biblical scripture that says "the circle of the globe[earth]" in concluding that the world was round (in harmony with other studies). The ruling authorities at that time thought the idea was laughable.

 

[Honestnathaniel]

In not sure that any theory or idea is outright laughable. Christopher Columbus in his journal related the significance of the Biblical scripture that says "the circle of the globe[earth]" in concluding that the world was round (in harmony with other studies). The ruling authorities at that time thought the idea was laughable.

I agree that no theory should ever be discarded, even if its only for historical study/comparison. And in sure there are ideas in the grey now which will gain acceptance in time, its how the cycle works.