spirituality

Oftentimes when I am talking to my scary atheist friends and debating the veracity of certain stories or books, they will shoot them down because they claim that the information or arguments used in them are based off anecdotes instead of authentic research or measurable laboratory results.

So I thought I’d take a look at the anecdote and think about whether its narration could ever be considered valid.  An anecdote is defined as a short story about a real person, thing, or event.

I will begin by conceding that the protest against the anecdote is fair to some extent – there is no great way to confirm whether the experience described by the person relating the anecdote is true.

For example, I have a friend who claims to have been haunted by a poltergeist in one of his past homes.  He described to me several incidents of having doors close and drawers slam and lights turn off.  He related everything calmly, and in great detail, and except for this one unusual experience he did not seem to have any other superstitions or ultra-religious beliefs.

I will confess that his stories spooked me a bit – I don’t think I roamed around in my house thereafter without some garlic and cat’s blood.  Or something like that.  But in general, I had no way of knowing whether these episodes actually happened or not.  Perhaps my friend was making them up completely.  Perhaps he truly believed events like that occurred, but he was hallucinating or seeing something else and misinterpreting it.  Or perhaps he was too young and his memory of what happened is distorted.  There could be numerous reasons why his stories may not be true.

Woman Speaking with Microphones

I can’t properly judge this particular scenario because I haven’t known my friend long enough to discern the truth behind his credibility or any biases.  But here is what I tell my atheist acquaintances in terms of how I view anecdotes of spiritual or religious experiences, and how I believe others view them as well:

A THEIST is someone who is prone to easily believing anecdotes, because one of the biggest recountings they trust is that told by their holy book – for example, the Bible.  After all, holy books are stories of historical incidents and people, which may or may not have been real.  So I would categorize ardent theists as individuals who tend to believe most, if not all religious anecdotes.

A hard-core ATHEIST is someone who may not believe ANY spiritual anecdotes, no matter who is saying them or what they are about.  The atheist view is that if something cannot be proven by science or evidence, it is not tenable.  It probably wouldn’t matter if God himself came down and spoke to us, atheists would most likely claim that the government put drugs in everyone’s water and we were all hallucinating together.

And then there are us AGNOSTICS.  We usually like to be in the middle, like a godly Goldilocks.  Although I shouldn’t presume to speak on behalf of all agnostics, so I’ll speak for myself.  As someone with both theist and atheist viewpoints, I neither fully believe nor disbelieve an anecdote at the outset.  Instead, I might give more weight to certain anecdotes over others.  It all depends on who is telling the story and what the story entails.

An anecdote on a ghost sighting by my ya-ya theist friend – let’s call her Phoebe – who goes to church every week and also believes in tarot cards, the ouija board, or other superstitions?  On a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the most convincing, I’d probably rate her ghost encounter a 1.  At a rating of 1, the anecdote would be one of many spiritual data points I collect and analyze, but it wouldn’t significantly change my thinking.

A supernatural anecdote by a more rational theist friend who may not be as gullible as the blind faith devotee, but still has a huge bias towards anything religious?  Her stories might warrant a 3.

The tale told by Oprah who claims to have seen a ghost in a hotel once?  (You can listen to her talk about it HERE.)  Oprah is someone who appears greatly inclined towards theism on the one hand, but on the other seems rather astute and no-nonsense.  I’d rate her ghost story a 6.  Having someone like Queen Oprah attest to a ghost viewing would, and did, budge the needle on my “ISM” scale a bit, away from atheISM and more towards theISM, though it couldn’t convert me fully.

Atheism vs Theism

A hypothetical future confession of having experienced the divine by someone like Sam Harris – an avowed and passionate atheist who won’t even concede the existence of free will – and who now recants his atheism and says he believes in God because of some recent experience?  If that shocking event were to actually happen one day, I’d give that a resounding 9!  I’d take a point off because he may be someone who could fake a story to increase his popularity and book sales.  But mostly I’d be forced to believe someone like him because of the unlikely turnaround, and it would weigh heavily on my ISM scale.

It would be rare for me to be at a 0 or 10.  I would not fully dismiss a story, unless it was particularly silly, or fully believe it either, unless it was really significant.

So to summarize – one gullible side believes almost anything if it fits into their confirmation bias, and all religious anecdotes are a 10.  They judge like Paula Abdul – it’s all good.  The other group will arrogantly concede to nothing, and for them, every story rates a 0.  They are Simon Cowell.  And then there is the reasonable middle – we’re Randy – where shades of grey matter.  Some stories work, and some are just too pitchy, dawg!

The potential power of the anecdote is important because oftentimes a litany of them are used in books to make a point.  It’s very common in books on spirituality, such as Many Lives, Many Masters or The Scalpel and the Soul or Proof of Heaven: A Neurosurgeon’s Near Death Experience.  All of these were authored by doctors who described encounters with the supernatural within their practices or in their own lives.  The stories have never been proven but the perceived legitimacy of the people telling them – medical professionals – could lend them weight, at least in some people’s view.

The cousin to the anecdote – the case study – is also used in popular books to make a point.  The case study is a bit different in that it’s not a personal story that may or may not have happened.  Instead, it’s an analysis of some existing incident or company or product that can be vetted.  But though the case study SUBJECT itself is verifiable, the CONCLUSIONS drawn from it may not be.

For example, famous author Malcom Gladwell uses alot of case studies in his best selling books The Tipping Point, The Outlier, and What The Dog Saw.  Highly respected and considered a brilliant social scientist, he has nevertheless been accused by critics of using carefully selected case studies to back his assertions, rather than proper, statistically significant research.  The common objection to his work is that there will always be a few stories that can be plucked and planted to support any argument of any kind, in lieu of proof via a larger number of data points.

Case studies are more reliable than anecdotes, of course, but they still fall into a grey area when used to support an assertion.  It’s interesting to note that some people will stubbornly shut out any kind of grey evidence when it comes to spirituality, angrily calling it “woo-woo nonsense” or “imbecilic superstition” but be open to grey in other areas.

To each their own, everyone has a right to their own opinion of course.  I remain friends with people on all ends of the ISM scale, though it can be a little frustrating when trying to have a discussion with someone on one extreme or the other.

On my end, I remain open to anecdotes.  If Bill Maher were to do an about-face tomorrow and tell us that he had a life-changing supernatural experience – one where he knows he was not hallucinating, and which has turned him from being an avid atheist to a passionate theist – you better believe that would make me sit up and take notice!  In fact, I’d run to the nearest ashram and give up the rest of my life to God, so spooked and convinced would I be with the shocking turn around.  For now, however, no anecdote or creepy ghost story has ever been powerful enough to knock me completely off my agnostic and hedonistic perch.  If one does, come find me . . . I’ll be hiding out at the nunnery.

Comments Box SVG iconsUsed for the like, share, comment, and reaction icons

Comment on Facebook

Funny what the brain can do, it even makes up crap when it don’t have all the information, know fact that has been stupid and papers written

The problem with anecdotes is that people too often take one tiny example and create a broad ideal from it.....like someone saying "I don't know anyone who died from Covid-19...it can't be all that serious." This ignores the data of more than 600,000 deaths in the US alone, based on one person's experience. It's like saying "But it snowed in Alabama last winter so there is no such thing as climate change." 🙄

Anything that shakes your carefully arranged ego house of concepts and idea cards is rather bothersome, because they disrupt your little house of cards. You’re frightened. How anyone reacts to an inexplicable ego crushing event depends on many factors. Seeing a ghost will create a crack which could either grow over or keep on cracking. Our fear is of the unknown. We like to think that what we know is correct. If not a rather uncomfortable collapsing feeling, a free fall feeling come on that average people will be frightened of. God is self evident. What is this now? Why is there life? It is and how! Most are so full and distracted and frightened to see the obvious. God is unknowable with words and concepts because it is everything. A man who had never seen the colour blue spent all his life studying it. He became a world renowned expert to all the rest who had never seen blue. You see blue. Blue cannot be defined with words to a blind man. So is the unknowable truth. People get glimpses and inflate their egos with the memory. Some pursue the truth all their live. BTW Maher is a 33 degree mason. He practices the dark path. He is a pathological liar.

The term spirituality has always been one that is vague, broad, and occasionally brings to mind visuals of freaks, like some skinny, fruity smelling vegan with wild hair who meditates all day and has a nose ring.

But I believe the term has been hijacked, and I’m here to claim it back!  That’s right, step aside you crazy yippy-hippies, and let the real spiritualists cut through.  Yes, I know that the concept of spirituality means many things to many people, and one’s person spirituality can be very different from that of someone else.  I get it.

Regardless, I’m tired of people touting The Secret and holding motivational touchy-feely events and telling you to be your best self in the name of spirituality.  Not that there is anything wrong with all of that, but it should be done under the name of self-help or psychology.  Spirituality is a word that should be reserved for those who are interested in exploring a planned design or higher power outside the realm of formal religion or man-made dogma.

Why do I care?  Because it’s confusing when I am trying to find articles or material on spirituality, that’s why!  (insert whiny voice here)  As someone who does alot of research on the topic in order to publish a blog on the same, it can often be a frustrating waste of time to thumb through irrelevant material.

Gun pointing at man typing on computer

I know I don’t own a patent on the word and it’s a free country and all, but let’s flip it around.  The word secular is defined as attitudes, events, or things that have no religious or spiritual basis.  So how would people like it if the word secular was wrongly used in situations where a God was discussed in general, but not necessarily by a specific name, i.e. Jesus, Allah, or Ram?  That would be incorrect, wouldn’t it?  Secularism is supposed to refrain from any kind of religious reference, even if it’s done in a generic way.  How would people like it if they participate in an event thinking it’s secular, and then hear spiritual or religious terms thrown about all day long?  You bet your spiffy speedos they would not.

In the same way, I believe the word spiritual should be NON-secular, and refer to someone who believes that there may be a planned design or higher power, but may not want to specifically follow the rituals of a particular religion.  That’s all.  It should not stolen and used for the idea of improving one’s own appearance or self in this life, if that’s all that one is pursuing.  Meditation for the sake of alleviating stress so one can be more productive in their current life is quite different than meditating for the sake of true, eternal enlightenment.

Now one can argue that charity starts at home and becoming a less disturbed, more calm individual leads to heightened spiritual states and knowledge.  That is true, but so does keeping a sound body and mind through exercise and taking vitamins.  That’s called nutrition and fitness, not spirituality.  A line needs to be drawn.  When one is not pursuing an activity that involves links to the great beyond or increased compassion and love for all sentient beings, when it is simply about one’s current self in one’s current incarnation, it should clearly be labeled as self-help.  A blog written by someone interested in hiking, nature walks, mindfulness, and stress techniques is more of a self-help blog, not a spiritual one.

I know many would disagree and I know there are alot of greys and overlapping areas that make it acceptable for one kind of spiritual to bleed into the other.  To me, veganism does involve true spirituality because it is the recognition that there is a suffering, loving soul in animals, not just humans.  It’s about greater awareness of others, not just one’s self, which to me is true spiritual enlightenment.  So it’s hard to define exactly what the boundaries of this word should be, and of course everyone’s perceptions vary.  

Therefore I know that my suggestion to more concisely define the term spirituality is simply my subjective and peevish wish and not going to actually happen and I’ve just wasted 20 minutes of my life writing this, as you have reading it.  But one can still put the idea out there in the universe, and hope that against all odds it may just sprout wings.  One never knows.

Comments Box SVG iconsUsed for the like, share, comment, and reaction icons

Comment on Facebook

Spirituality to me means peace and tranquillity, a love of nature and all the little creatures we share this beautiful planet with. The majesty of the mountains and the sweeping pine forests and the turbulence of the oceans. The blue skies with little puffy clouds, the heat of the sun and the cool beauty of the moon and stars. Spirituality for me is feeling at one with the planet.

Living a spiritual life means simply to go forward with a compassionate heart and a strong mind. To not be responsible for causing any living being pain. Simple, but not easy.

When the heart, mind, soul and body are in agreeance, then we are on a spiritual path. Any one of the four out of balance, then we have an error and need to check what we are doing.

If you doesnt believe the existence of soul, isnt it irony to believe spirituality? Many people believe happiness is when you achive high spiritual level. But our happiness is affected by hormones and body biochemistry. Emotions and feelings exist only with bodily form. Even if soul exist, he is not a being with emotion.

I did research on secular spirituality, and I will say spirituality means connection beyond oneself. Almost all the secular sites I found had that word. From my perspective, connection can mean interacting, observing, understanding, or sharing with another, such as a community, nature, or the universe. The feeling of immersing deep in wonder of the beauty of our world understood by science, psychology, history and social research can be just as beautiful, if not more, than what the religious see. And more importantly, it's proven through rigorous investigation.

Spirituality is usually a way to behave to please God without beinbg part of any religion!

Spirituality is about the non-physical aspects of life. It is understanding there are things we don't understand and looking within for answers that words cannot properly describe. It is distinguished from religion in being free from dogma and customs that are woven into lessons on spirituality to keep it grounded which makes it more approachable and less accurate. Spirituality is the realization we are all one.

Spirituality literally and originally in many languages means the way of the mindful breath. from latin spiritus meaning breath, wind . Semitic rauchaia from ruch =breath, Amazigh tahawit from ahu =breath.nothing to do with the spooky higher powers youtu.be/rBu5AmrxWu4

Thank you for wasting my time. If you hadn't already known that each person using the word 'spirituality' has his/her own definition of the word you must be living under a rock. You said at the outset that you were going to define, which was the only reason I read it, and you failed to do so. Then you realised this yourself, admitted to it, but still posted this non-article. Why? Either give the definition or take it down and stop wasting people's time and making a fool of yourself.

Self realisation...

just remember god doesn't exist.

SPIRITUALITY & VEGANISM The righteous avoid and abhor harm to living beings, lies and slander. He speaks the truth and does not deceive others. He speaks words that bring about unity. VEGAN 🕉️ Endocannabinoid-System 🕉️ N a m a s t é

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

Subscribe to our newsletter to get the latest content delivered to your inbox.  

(NOTE:  We hate spam and will never sell your email!)