Spirituality Is Secure Attachment with Reality
intimatemirror.substack.com
Spirituality Is Secure Attachment with Reality
1–10 of 25 posts
Re: Spirituality Is Secure Attachment with Reality
#2Spirituality is not universally a belief in non-reality but it mostly is. This overloading of the word with it's opposite might be useful within their group but I think it'll just cause confusion in a global namespace.
Re: Spirituality Is Secure Attachment with Reality
#3Spirituality is not universally a belief in non-reality but it mostly is. This overloading of the word with it's opposite might be useful within their group but I think it'll just cause confusion in a global namespace.
yeah. This post seems basically right, but it's not what most of the rest of the world means by "spirituality".
Re: Spirituality Is Secure Attachment with Reality
#4I've always wondered if feeling like I am something in something is the standard human experience. Never mind the philosophy or religion or any of that stuff, just the sense that I am a thing inside a thing (a spirit in a body, but that isn't quite right, more like a body+spirit in a body+spirit world?) I've always wondered if basically everyone feels this way.
I thought this was good: "spirituality is, at its heart, about our relationship with reality itself. Whether we name it God, Buddha-nature, or simply Life, we are always in relationship with it. The quality of that relationship - secure or insecure, trusting or defensive - shapes every aspect of our experience." - but the author uses "reality itself" and "just like a child" waaaayyy to often, at least they are honest at the start there is a lot of LLM in there.
Re: Spirituality Is Secure Attachment with Reality
#5There is this really useful word, immanence, that I wish were more widely known. Basically it means “focused on this world and human experience.”
I learned this in A Secular Age, a fantastic book by the philosopher Charles Taylor. Basically the book is about how modern western society is increasingly immanent, focused on this reality and not on what is after life; e. g., heaven and hell, punishments and rewards after life, personal experience after death, and so on.
I bring this up because I think a decent working definition of spirituality is how one navigates this immanent situation. It seems to me that there quite likely is something beyond the bounds of human experience, but we aren’t quite sure what it is. A successful version of spirituality, to me, would be a way of navigating this situation in such a way that is psychologically healthy and philosophically justifiable. Simply denying existence outside of human frames seems like a denial of reality.
Re: Spirituality Is Secure Attachment with Reality
#6This article seemed like it was talking in circles and I have a really hard time understanding wtf this guy was talking about. Then I saw the header that this was in part taken from conversations with AI and now I just think it’s AI slop. I’m kind of annoyed I read the whole thing.
Re: Spirituality Is Secure Attachment with Reality
#7I found this post (and the one he had posted before it) to be very useful and descriptive. I find it very interesting to attempt to view this through the lens of attachment. Creative! I have been going through a similar breakdown the last 4-5 months and some of the perspectives resonate with me. It helped to feel some community in this process.
Re: Spirituality Is Secure Attachment with Reality
#8> God, as I heard recently in a Catholic mass, is always facing us - though we so often turn away. Like a securely attached mother, Reality/God remains present, ready to repair, connect, love, and attune. Our task isn't to earn this love but to develop the capacity to receive it, to stay present even when it challenges and shatters our familiar views of self and world.
I hate to pick out just one quote, but this is really emblematic of the issue I have with the source article. A Catholic mass is not about our psychological status or abstract relationship with reality - it's a remembrance of the incarnation of God into a specific man we call Jesus, his life in the ancient Roman governate of Judaea, his execution and resurrection, and his plans to come back and resurrect all of us at some point in the future.
If you would prefer to follow "Reality/God", more power to you. But it's critical to recognize that you're rejecting the Catholic tradition by doing so, not following some deeper truth.
Re: Spirituality Is Secure Attachment with Reality
#9There is this really useful word, immanence , that I wish were more widely known. Basically it means “focused on this world and human experience.” I learned this in A Secular Age , a fantastic book by the philosopher Charles Taylor. Basically the book is about how modern western society is increasingly immanent, focused on this reality and not on what is after life; e. g., heaven and hell, punishments and rewards aft…
"Reality" is such a loaded word. It assumes a lot: existence of something outside the observer; its durability and continuity; presence of other similar observers, who also sense the reality in "essentially the same" way, with a lot of problems in defining the "sameness"; the idea that the "objective reality" also still exists in absence of any observers. For the reality to be "objective", the observers also need to be somehow durable, so with passage of "time", they could make some repeat observations and notice that the results are the same, that is, the reality must have "laws".
It's pretty tall order.
But, if we go with it by extending the reality past human death (why only human?), we, the humans, usually make it hugely anthropocentric, often more so than when astronomy put Earth in the center of universe. For me, it's a sign that many spiritual movements try to serve as a consolation to humans fearing death, rather than an honest research of anything past "this side" of reality. Certainly there are kinds of spirituality that avoid this trap, e.g. Theravada Buddhism; sadly it tries to describe provably incorrect things, like a number of heavens at particular heights above Earth.
A spiritualism that tries to pass simple checks should either actually predict "physical reality" and thus become science, or drop any pretenses that it can be observable in the "physical reality", thus going firmly into the realm of not even fairy tales but of strictly internal experience of an observer, hence becoming solipsist. Solipsism is logically entitled to anything :)
If you just "want to believe", the Pascal's Wager is as good as it has always been.
Re: Spirituality Is Secure Attachment with Reality
#10This article seemed like it was talking in circles and I have a really hard time understanding wtf this guy was talking about. Then I saw the header that this was in part taken from conversations with AI and now I just think it’s AI slop. I’m kind of annoyed I read the whole thing.
It's the hyphens that always give it away, hyphen or hyphen family. Just as an experiment, I ctrl'f'ed "-" on this article, 28, then I went to "best medium articles of 2012 2013 2014, average is 6/7 of them with high being ~ > 13
Never the less, the article mostly made sense to me, although it was a bit circular, I still found it tolerable as far as LLM assisted work goes, def didn't feel "written by AI".