In the thread “The Difference Between the Creator and God’ I asked a question that Myrrdin and Aus22 thought was deserving of its own thread.
The context was a statement that scientists do not have the answers needed to meet “Man’s spiritual needs.”

So here is the question:

What does the term “Man’s spiritual needs” mean, anyway?

Don’t expect any hints from me, since the phrase completely baffles me; but I do hear it bandied about and there is a (figurative) nodding of heads that would indicate some common understanding.

I do have one request. Try to make your answers understandable to those of us that do not consider any book to be divinely inspired or to contain the unassailable words of a prophet, etc. The phrase seems to be speaking of a universal need by all men (and women, of course) for something vaguely called spiritual.

Actually, I think Science, with its relentless pursuit of truth and its willingness to say 'I don't know' when it doesn't, has the perfect answer for man's spiritual needs. By not relying on an outside source, man has to go within to find the strength. It requires a level of scrutiny of one's values, a mirror if you will, that many cannot face.

There are more than a few atheists and agnostics of my acquaintance, and I hope they won't take offense when I say this, but strangely I find a degree of spirituality in them that I've not seen anywhere else.

"The modern western worldview is dominated by the materialist values of science. According to Huston Smith, Ph.D., this withdrawal of emphasis from human values--and from essential elements such as meaning, quality and purpose--has led to widespread alienation and social discontent."

Now, having quoted Mr. Smith ... I hope that you can see the value in what is 'meant' rather than interpret it to mean a whole disregard for science. I came upon a certain understanding back in grad school when I was taking a life-stage development class (psych) and the brief premise is that within each decade of our lives we tend towards ... figuring out the same things.. such as relationships, career, family, etc.. and spiritual ..

"(James)Fowler's Theory of Faith Development
The adult stages in Fowler's theory typically include stages three through six. The earlier stages generally follow normal progressive development, and the various stages of faith are neither achievements, nor progressive steps to salvation, but simply degrees that one's faith goes through as it develops. The following is a short description of each of these stages:

Stage 3. Synthetic-conventional: In this stage, a person knows why he/she believes. One pulls together various parts of faith and tends to conform to the majority, and people are rewarded or punished for following rules laid down by the proper authority (the church or Bible). Views at this stage are often stereotyped.

Stage 4. Individuative-reflective: There is a relocation of authority within the self, along with a critical reflection of one's beliefs. Faith becomes uniquely one's own. In addition, there is usually a struggle to grow and understand.

Stage 5. Conjunctive: Individuals realize the paradoxes in faith, and learn to live with their faith and their questions. This stage involves a dynamic, trusting relationship with Source/God/Universal Spirit etc....

Stage 6. Universalizing Faith: This stage is defined by feeling at one with Source/God/Universal Spirit etc.... People here invest their lives in a larger cause without being concerned by the personal cost.

These stages are simply frameworks of understanding people and where they are in regard to their faith. " And I will add, there is much debate about theories of development in general.. so take this info as a guide and not as an absolute.


Now please note that there is no 'content of faith' ie: Christianity, Islamic..etc to this concept of faith development. Which is why I've always liked it. And it also speaks to a larger humanistic need for meaning.. how we answer that for ourselves, is... what I call our own spiritual path. At one point or another in our lifetimes most of us come to a question.. "Is there a 'More'? " to use William James' term.

How we answer that.. I think.. depends on our unique view of this world.. (based on our upbringing, culture, innate nature, personal life experiences..etc) if we see this world as fundamentally hostile, indifferent, gracious.. that will shape the spiritual path we take. (and/or avoid)

“the force that through the green fuse drives the flower” Dylan Thomas

Recently I've been thinking about the Health Care profession, and how attitudes have changed over the past few decades. It seems like before our doctors would assume the authority of God in our lives, tellinf us what to eat and what not to do without giving us much reasoning behind their "medical advice". Gradually though things have changed, and for the most part health care professionals realize that what they do is a science (not a fact), and they like to inform us now of our risks and our options, based upon the most up to date studies of the situation.


I would love to see religion take the same turn. Instead of declarations of what must be done to "gain God's approval" (or whatever the goal may be), perhaps it is time to admitt that we do not know everything yet. We are a work in progress. Those who wish to absolve all responsibility for their own spiritual health can listen to whichever teachers they want to to be told a definitly maked out path, whether it be right or wrong. But for those truly interested in a spiritually healthy lifestyle, they need to take an active role in their own well-being.

Under these terms I would love to establish myself as a "Spiritual Health-Care Professional". I enjoy helping people find pieces of the Truth, provided of course that they are interested in seeking it out. I can tell you with all assurity that certain things are more healthy (spiritually) for you than others; and that for certain symptoms there are specific solutions that seem to help the majority of people who have tried them.

I have no interest in running people's lives though, as the old system seems to have conditioned us to expect. I'm not quite sure at this point how to take the stand that's necessary to get people to see the difference.

I think man aspires to a God-conscious but can not get there. During sleep, in our unconscious state the need for union with the devine still exists but we do not know how to get it met when we wake. We cover up psychic suffering with substitutes. We fulfill this need with the use of substances, circumstances and relationships that are NOT the real thing.

I agree CP, consciousness.. Beingness, seems a far off ideal when viewed from this world of identification with form and thought.. with the mind. Every ancient Wisdom tradition speaks to this. When we self-identify with our thoughts, our roles, what we have, what we do.. we get further and further away from the very gift of consciousness within.

It's tricky Wandering... Dysfunctional responses are the result of one's urge to unite with the devine and not succeeding (of course)... In an effort to connect to something vaster than ourselves many of us form "addictions" from alcoholism and drug abuse to work addiction, co dependent relationships and even martyrdom. Attempts to fulfill our soul are illusionary and delusionary at best. We end up deceiving others and worse, our ourselves.

Most of the contributions are interesting but I think chocolategenii is too extreme.

Man has always tried to get to a higher state or as Christains would say to be closer to God. Yes some do it through the bottle or drugs where they abandon reason to have an emotional experience.
However religion in its pure historical form has not abandon reason. Christianity was buit on Plato, Socrates and Aristole logic. It did not anandon Greek Philiosophy but reform it and evolve it to a higher form. It also continue to expand education. Most Universities were founded by the Church. Even modern science was started in the late Middle ages by the church. Most earlier scientists were Catholic even clergy.It is only in the last few centuries that science and Christianity seems to have split.

This I think is because science has moved into the field of Philiosphy and religion. It has attempted to fill in the gaps so that there is no need for a religion. This is where Christianity claims that man has spiritual needs that can not be satisfy by science. This Spiriual needs mean the need of all men to go beyond the material world. This has been part of christianity since Augustine. He said there was a City of God above and in some cases opposed to the city of Man. He condemned the emphasis on Martydom by extreme sects like the Donatists.However he thought these was a above rerason. "I no longer cherish the delusion that I can somehow reach a higher level of spirituality by mere intellect"( [i]Saint Augustine by Rachel M Phillips) He also attack some aspects of Roman mythology showing their inconsistencies. Early Rome did not exhibited the fictional nobility attributed to it by contempoaray pagans (ibid)

Spirtual values are more than reason more than behaviour, they are values that supercede the desire of this world.Plato divides Knowledge into Intelligence and Mathemantical reasoning. I am not an expert of these. However he does admit that there is also Opinion divided into belief and Illusions. To belief that a thing exist even it can not been seen is acceptable. "commonsense beliefs on matters both moral and physical which are a fair practical guide to life but have not been fully thought out " [i]Plato transalated by Desmond Lee Second Edition Penquin Books)

It is this belief system that fulfills our spiritual needs. It could even be a belief in science as Plato later admits as long as you accept it has not been fully thought out, or not been proven. The idea of Theoris is common to science as it is to religion.These can be said to be atempts to fulfil our souls. They are essential to satisying the spirtual needs. They may be a dellusion if you think we can reach full knowledge in this world. But they are only an illusion if you think present scientific knowledge answers all needs of men. To suggest that there are no needs that cannot be satisfy by current knowledge is the illusion.

I'm not talking about "spirituality" in direct relation to Christianity, although my brand can be applied to the Christian belief and practices...

The most basic illusion is that the experience of uniting with the devine is found in temporary - worldly substitutes - someone or something outside ourselves. These false unions can be with, addictive substances, daddy/mommy stand in's - partners, (co dependent relationships), political and or religious ideologies, and material possessions including identifying with financial and social status.

"I am a.....religion, political party, race etc." ...fill in the blank here, as we all have them. It is only when we recognize we use substitutes...and recognize our own substitutes for our devine connection that we can begin to shift our strategy to getting our real spiritual need met!

aus wrote

There ya have it! I was saying....