Agnostic Mom

This is part one of my second rebuttal to Larry, in our on-going debate about secular spirituality. If you are new to this site, I recommend you go to my initial challenge to read the dialogue from the beginning.

In Larry’s Apology/Surrender/Rebuttal/Challenge, he fakes concession. Larry concedes it might be (arguably) appropriate for an agnostic to acknowledge spirituality, but not for athiests. What my readers may not realize, is Larry is taking a jab at me. He knows that I am on the athiest end of the agnostic spectrum.

Larry believes it wrong for an athiest to acknowledge a spiritual aspect of life, because he only regards spirituality as being supernatural; as transcending the human experience. This is why he thinks it intellectually inconsistent, whether athiest or agnostic. Once again, I have to disagree with my good friend, Larry Keim. Religious people have misunderstood spirituality. It is a human experience, purely physical, transcending nothing except the mundane. This is why even a strong athiest is intellectually consistent in his or her search for a strong spiritual life. I will explain.

Larry wants to separate a human being’s “vital core” and “moral nature” from “brain function” and “genetic proclivities.” Larry knows that I believe everything we think and feel is simple brain function. What he doesn’t seem to get is that spiritual feelings are part of brain function and nothing more. It doesn’t make it any less desirable, wonderful, healthy, and necessary. Spirituality only transcends normal day-to-day feeling. It does not transcend the natural.

For example, one thing I do to tap into my own spirituality, is to run on my treadmill. Running is meditative and calming for me. It allows me to regroup; to focus. It is my time to take a step back from the daily grind, evaluate it, and get new ideas. Running also releases endorphins, and I get to experience a high. During and after my run, I feel accomplished, empowered, and confident. I am ready to return to my world with clarity and cheerfulness.

For all these reasons, running, for me, is a spiritual exercise. The feelings and thoughts are also purely physical.

Another reason I think spirituality is physical, has to do with the experiences I have had when learning new ideas. When I was religious, I had spiritual feelings as I read scripture. They were “A-ha” type moments, that made me feel elated when I learned something. I considered those spiritual experiences to be a kind of communication between God and myself.

Since becoming agnostic, I can read things entirely contradictory to scripture, and still have the same “A-ha” moments. I have come to the conclusion that the feelings are just a part of human experience; it is a type of brain function to feel elation when learning something new, or when making a cerebral connection. The idea doesn’t even have to be true. It just needs to connect with your experience. This would explain why people, all around the world, with different beliefs, can have such strong convictions.

Perhaps we evolved this ability to experience a high at learning a new idea. It would increase our chances of survival, because it would compel us to more learning and understanding. It drove the human race to the level of knowledge and technology that we are at now.

Once again, this physicality of spirituality, or the idea that it is a product of evolution and natural selection, doesn’t make it any less wonderful or valuable.

Since I am a proponent of using scientific evidence, rather than relying on pure philosphy, I found a few articles you can read regarding the subject of spirituality and the brain.

Steven Pinker is probably the greatest living genius that my studies have exposed me to. He wrote an article about how the brain and the soul are one and the same.

Here is an article about research on brain function and spirituality, specifically regarding seratonin levels and how they effect our individual spiritual natures.

I also found this amazing article about a type of research called “transhumanism,” that seeks to understand the biological, physiological, and physchological causes of spirituality, independent of religion. This article is very long, and slightly academic, but I definitely recommend it. The farther you read into it, the more relevant the article it becomes to our discussion. (Larry: I think you, in particular, will find this article valuable, considering your sensitivity to “memes”).

I want to answer Larry’s charges on “moral nature” in a part two rebuttal. This may take me another week, since the next seven days will be filled with cookie baking, Christmas parties, present wrapping, etc. In the meantime, I will be posting articles that require less brainwork than the part two rebuttal!