Note: This is
merely a first draft. Comment would be highly appreciated.
SPIRITUAL LIFE
F Richard Singer III mailto:pndp@sbcglobal.net and H Paul Zeiger mailto:paulzeiger@aol.com
This paper is available on the website: http://www.conceptualstudy.org/
Purpose: Today’s
world features members of a great variety of religions, atheists, agnostics,
and those of other spiritual persuasions, all living side by side, interacting
in various ways, and frequently disagreeing or just talking past each
other -- unable even to establish
mutually understood questions upon which to disagree about the answers. We (the authors of this paper) feel that this
lack of communication is unfortunate, and that it can be combated, in some
degree, with the help of a careful study of the concepts that are used to talk
about spiritual life regardless of whose spiritual life it is. In this paper,
we attempt such a study. After using the concept of multiple significance to
provide a provisional characterization of ‘spiritual’, we begin with a dialog
that illustrates some of the communication difficulties. We then comment on the
dialog and further present a brief encyclopedia of concepts for communicating
about spirituality. Specifically we begin by conceptualizing what it means to
have a spiritual life. We then examine some types of spiritual needs and
aspirations, relating these to two main concepts of spiritual wellbeing. Finally,
we examine the concepts used to characterize the spiritual realm. We intend
that the concepts and language presented here will enable persons of differing
spiritual persuasions to negotiate their ways to productive cooperation without
putting down any of the participants in the discussion. We have tried to
demonstrate this “no put-downs” policy in our own use of language thruout the
paper. Note that we are not
necessarily proposing getting to agreements on how the world works or what the
best rules for behavior might be. Instead, we are pointing toward negotiating
towards agreement on joint actions
acceptable to all concerned.
Multiple Significance: Dan is splitting logs. The significance of
this includes what else he is doing by doing this, what importance doing this
has for him. His friends know that he is providing wood for burning in his
stove. This is part of the significance, but there is more. In getting
firewood, he is saving money on his heating bill, indicating another
significance consideration. This significance chain could be extended if we knew
that in saving money he is preparing for early retirement. By extending this
chain and seeing other significance aspects of what Dan is doing in this
apparently simple act, a larger life pattern begins to emerge. For a more
detailed illustration of significance, see The Farmhouse and The Tennis Game
(Ossorio, 2006, p107 and P299).
Spirituality: A temporal realm (i.e. a specific area of interest) in the world of a person or persons is one that relates to wants that are time dependent, and may even call for immediate action. On the other hand, Spirituality is a realm that transcends the temporal. A want along with any associate behavior is spiritual to the extent that its significance goes beyond the mundane wants that routinely wax and wane in relation to a person’s immediate circumstances and current characteristics. Moreover, the significance of the associated behavior transcends these circumstances and characteristic. The spiritual components of a person’s life may not always be apparent, at least without looking at the deeper significance of what might initially seem only mundane. Whenever the significance of an action to satisfy a want concerning timelessness or ultimates or totalities, we can identify these as having a strong spiritual component. In Spirituality (Shideler 1992, p33) the spiritual realm is characterized as having {timelessness, ultimates, totality, transcendence, holiness, boundary conditions} as its main concerns. Altho this does not define the spiritual realm, it gives central conceptual conditions for this realm. An ordinary meaning of these terms is all that we need for now, but they will be further explained at the end of later.
Spiritual & Temporal: It is important to note that the contrast between spiritual and
temporal is conceptualized as a matter of extent rather than as a
dichotomy. For instance, wanting to
avoid mortgage foreclosure usually has a strong temporal component, for altho
it may not call for immediate action, doing something about it had better not
be postponed too long. However, wanting to avoid foreclosure can have a
spiritual component if the action taken also involves to wanting to be the kind
of person who accepts responsibility. Having routine safety is likely to be
more of a temporal than a spiritual need, altho some of its significance may be
to have a sense of belonging in the greater scheme of things. If so, this need
may have more of a spiritual component than seems apparent. Even a vital
biologically need that seems primarily temporal, such as the needs for oxygen
and food, may have spiritual components. For most humans, meeting a vital need usually has some significance beyond mere biological
survival
Spiritual Life: In order to indicate what we mean by a person’s spiritual life consider an analogy with the better known: family life, sex life, professional life, social life, suburban life, etc. In each case there is a related realm, (family, sex, etc.) To get from realm X to “X life”, consider Ossorio’s comment on the drama of human lives and his statement of the basic conceptual condition for the person concept.
A person is an
individual whose history is, paradigmatically, a history of deliberate action
in a dramaturgical pattern. (Ossorio 2006, p9)
In the
Dramaturgical Model, behavior is intrinsically and fundamentally a matter of
creating and realizing personal and social dramas. Human lives are
intrinsically and fundamentally dramatic in form. (Ossorio 2006, p290)
Dramas have main plots and (frequently) subplots. When one’s personal drama has a subplot identified by realm X, that subplot is the person’s “X life”. Moreover having a significant X life usually involves a person (at least implicitly) recognizing and authoring the drama of that life.
Application: So what? The above construction explains a few things:
Why not every realm X will do (no “algebra life”– ordinarily no subplot, no drama).
Why everybody has spirituality, at least in the sense of having spiritual needs and aspirations, not everyone has a spiritual life (not everyone authors that particular subplot).
Next consider the expression “Get a life!” We conjecture that it is roughly synonymous with “the drama that constitutes your life is lacking in competent authorship, and it is time to do something about it.” This latter representation can suggest tools for getting a life: articulating values, resources, personal characteristics, choosing ideals and sometimes goals, casting other persons, assigning significance and status, playing our chosen roles with integrity, meeting relevant needs, having aspirations, etc. The same reasoning applies to getting a spiritual life. Not everybody wants one, altho many people would claim that even those who may not want a spiritual life need one. For those of us who want a spiritual life, the above considerations provide some initial guidance.
Exercise for readers who feel a need to get a spiritual life: Use the above tools to devise a plan for doing so. (Hint: You might start by elaborating your spirituality and exploring what you consider good drama)
Needing or Wanting a Spiritual Life: A man might be told that he is working so much that he is neglecting his social life and his family life. A person without a spiritual life might be characterized as one whose attention never strays beyond daily (“mundane”) needs and aspirations. Such a person might himself find his life lacking in significance, like Sisyphus. We invite papers using the concepts in this present paper to give examples illustrating different types of spiritual life. These examples could be taken directly from personal experience either of your or others that you have know well. They could be based on the lives of actual or imagined person. Some well-known persons with differing types of spiritual beliefs and commitments include Mother Theresa, Bertrand Russell, The Dalai Lama, Julius Caesar Mahatma Ghandi, Billy Graham, etc. Vocation imagined or actual may play a noteworthy role in a person’s spiritual life. Thus spiritual life for a person might relate to such vocations as Army Chaplain, Hospice Volunteer, Terrorist, Cloistered Nun, Grand Inquisitor Congregation President, Missionary, etc.
A Dialog: The
characters imagined in the dialog have studied together for years and have
remained friends in college. Jan is a religion major
with pantheistic beliefs. She sees the universe as the body of God and thus as
a manifestation of spiritual energy.
James is in a cleared field in a cloudless night
looking at the stars. Knowing that he lives in the city, and that this sight
differs in a noteworthy manner from what he usually sees, there is more that we
might surmise. It seems clear that he wants to look, for otherwise he could
turn his attention elsewhere. In fact, we would be right if we said that he is
appreciating an esthetic experience as he is looking at the stars. Knowing more
we can see this is only part of the significance of what James is doing. He is
on vacation from a hectic life, and we could further redescribe what he is
doing by adding that he is also gaining a sense of peace and reducing stress.
He is experiencing in a sense of stability, as he reflects on the centuries of
fixed star patterns and their predicable positions. Talking with James, further
significance could be discovered. While looking at the Big Dipper he is finding
his compass orientation. Moreover knowing the date, he is using its position to
estimate that it is about an hour past midnight. In thinking about the time, he
is considering whether he has been gone so long that his family might start to
worry. However this is of passing significance to him. More significant, James
is thinking of his puzzlement about time. He can neither imagine time having a
beginning nor stretching infinitely into the past. He is also reflecting on the
vastness of space and similar puzzlements, altho these intellectual musings are
not what is most significant. Nor is it the mere esthetic appreciation. Most
noteworthy to James is the emotional significance what he is doing. He has for
a brief time transcended his daily world and turned his attention to the “largest” features of
his world.
Bob: This certainly could be a spiritual experience of a type documented repeatedly in my tradition – one in which God reaches down and removes a veil from James’ eyes. God is saying, “Look! Here is my handiwork”. Gaze on it in awe and wonder. And walk away a better, wiser, man.” And James walks away better and wiser for having the limits of his world stretched, and his stresses set in a better perspective.
Jan: I agree with everything that Bob just said except for the assumption of God as a person standing outside the universe. I see the universe itself as having the power to interact with James in exactly the way Bob has described. Life is always more than survival, as all life participates in the spiritual unfolding of the universe. Thinking about God’s handy work is not especially relevant. Any esthetic experience is spiritual.
Bob: These so-called details are hard to delineate because the reduction is impossible. A flower may attract insects, and this may enhance the chance for pollination, but you cannot explain Sistine Chapel in this manner. We can only fully appreciate it because of its religious grandeur and the way it relates us to God. This is true even for an atheist, altho his disbelief may diminish its spiritual significance.
Kay: You are all confounding beliefs with concepts. In discussing the temporal and spiritual aspects of what James was doing, such beliefs are an irrelevant distraction. We are told that James has at least briefly transcended his daily world and turned his attention from the immediate time and towards the largest features of his world. Assuming that this description is correct, and using the concept of spirituality that we were given, there was a spiritual component to his experience. This is conceptually undeniable. Likewise it is conceptually undeniable that in obtaining a compass orientation and estimating the time there is a temporal component.
Bob: God is not a figment of our imagination. My problem with the concept we were given and Kay’s willingness to use a concept of spiritual that neglects God is that this eviscerates the true concept of spiritual. Of course with the concept we were given, what she says is correct but useless.
Jan: I am inclined
to agree that something important is missing form the concept of spirituality
that we have been given, but with Bob I want a stronger concept, while
Kay: I see that I must make a case for utility of the concepts we were given. However for now let us forget the connotations of spiritual and temporal and take them as given above. Doing this, can we agree about how they apply to James’ experience? We can then turn to the question of utility.
Bob: The description does support the contention that there is a spiritual component to his experience (under the characterization of spirituality being put forth here) even if James is an atheist. That he has briefly transcended his daily world and turned his attention to the largest features of his world clearly indicates transcendence and totality. I still say that without awareness of God something is missing.
Jan: We all agree that in using the proposed concept there was a spiritual component in James’ experience. This partially makes the case for the utility of that concept. However we need to go further. This concept of does not enable us to focus on what we really find important. It ignores the depth and quality of the spiritual component. It neglects spiritual wellbeing.
Bob: Not all spiritual experiences are of the same quality or depth. Mere awe and wonder is not enough to provide for authentic spiritual wellbeing. James must also link this to what I first said about God’s handiwork.
Kay: Allow me
to add to this discussion some new – pragmatic – considerations. Suppose for a
moment that use the word ‘spirituality’ in the way it has been given. Suppose further that we agree to add
emotionally neutral modifiers to it in order to characterize the various
flavors of spirituality favored by the three of you, say, ‘theistic
spirituality’ for Bob, ‘physicalistic spirituality’ for
Jan: Also such conventions help steer discussions away from debates about how we should be talking (e.g. about what ‘spirituality’ means) and what we should believe, and toward more productive discussions of what we can appreciate doing together. For example, Christians and Buddhists cooperating on an orphanage could more easily speak of spirituality and the ethical principle of compassion, which they would also agree is spiritual, while avoiding implicit references to a personal God on which they disagree. What is needed is a tolerance of different beliefs.
Bob: Agreed, having quarantined some troublesome issues of belief, we might be able more effectively to explore other aspects of spirituality that we might share like depth, quality, etc.
Kay: Recall the multiple significance concept. Bob wants to know more than was given in the description. Suppose that in transcending his daily world James was also experiencing this as God’s handiwork. Would this make the spiritual component have greater depth and quality than if it were absent? Would this help enhance his spiritual wellbeing?
Jan: This would
mean that spirituality for James was ultimately theistic spirituality. This
would certainly add significance. It would also provide a greater satisfaction.
In that sense, it would have greater depth and quality.
Bob: I would assume that greater depth and quality would be the main components that would enhance a sense of wellbeing. On the other hand, actual spiritual wellbeing cannot be attained unless the spiritual component is theistic. Any other form of spirituality can only give an illusion of wellbeing. It shuts us off from the real source of our spiritual wellbeing, namely faith in God.
Kay: It has been helpful to first negotiate language and concepts that we agree to use before presenting our beliefs. This has helped to bring our disagreements into focus, but not to settle them. I do not know which of the three flavors of spirituality that we have elaborated here would best enhance my spiritual wellbeing. I am inclined to think that given any of the three types of spirituality we mentioned, a person may or may not actually obtain spiritual wellbeing. It may depend more on how the type is lived rather than its type. Of course there is a caveat. I can imagine that there are reality constraints that limit certain types from providing actual wellbeing.
Jan: Altho I think that pantheism has the greatest potential for actual spiritual wellbeing, I think that spiritual practices are more significant than beliefs. Recall what I said earlier about tolerance and cooperation between Christians and Buddhist. I agree that a person may attain significant spiritual wellbeing thru many types of spiritual experience.
Bob: I
certainly agree that much can be accomplished and that a sense of spiritual
wellbeing can be obtained thru various types of spiritual experience. Tolerance
involves working together as Jan said, and in not trying to force your beliefs
on others. I still intend to witness to the most basic reality constraint,
namely that true spiritual wellbeing depends on faith in Jesus as the Son of God.
However the best way to witness is thru what one does rather than thru what one
says.
Commentary on the Dialog: Our characters started with the distinct advantage of having a history of friendship and a shared network of concepts for a wide variety of realms of interest. Moreover they have the kind of general respect for each other that enables them to tolerate their differences. They were able to make some headway. By the end of the discussion, they had enough agreement on language and concepts to disagree productively, in contrast with talking past each other. Moreover, their refined understanding of their disagreements will stand them in good stead should they engage in some joint project that requires working around those disagreements.
Altho the discussion helped them imagine some shared spirituality concepts and bring some of their differences into better focus, this dialog may only have resulted in a minimal mastery of the concepts they actually used. In general, for many concepts, operational mastery involves more than a single use. Moreover they did not mention some concepts that we consider important for understanding the understanding of each other’s belief about spirituality. Nor did they develop the concept of spiritual wellbeing fully enough to bring their disagreements into sharper focus.
Maxim: Concepts are acquired by practice and experience. The relevant practice and experience is participating in some of the social practices that involve using the concept in question. (Ossorio 2006 page 19) and (Ossorio 1998 page 64).
The rest of this paper uses some concepts from descriptive Psychology to develop the concepts our characters did mention along with some they did not. Since Descriptive Psychology concepts are versions of those routinely used by most people, an ordinary understanding of their usage should be sufficient for the purposes of this paper. In some cases we discuss the specialized version of a concept, as we did with the significance concept used earlier. Our discussion of any concept should usually be taken as a partial specification of its use, rather than as a definition. For more perspective on the concepts from Descriptive Psychology, see (Shideler 1988) or see the concept encyclopedia on the above website. Below are some concepts for communicating about spirituality.
Spiritual Depth: Spiritual significance usually comes further out the significance chain than temporal significance, thus having greater depth. However a significance chain need not end as soon as spiritual significance is reached. In reflecting on the vastness of space, he might also be seeing himself as belonging in this greater scheme of things or in the opposite manner as expressed in the Rubaiyat below.
But helpless Pieces
of the Game He plays
Upon this Chequer-board of Nights and Days;
Hither and thither moves, and checks, and slays,
And one by one back in the Closet lays.
In either any, we can extend the significance chain, given greater depth.
Spiritual Quality: Depth relates to quality, but more is involved. How satisfying is it? Does it resonate with the dramaturgical pattern of the actor’s life and with the actors place in the greater scheme of things? See Ossorio (2006, page 374) on “who are you?”
Spiritual Needs and Aspirations: Having a spiritual life relates to a person’s spiritual needs and aspirations. A need (spiritual or otherwise) is conceptualized from a deficit perspective, i.e. not meeting a need tends to reduce or even undermine a person’s behavior potential. A need is called basic for a person if prolonged failure to meet it is likely to result in a major loss of behavior potential, thus resulting in some type of pathological state. Our need for routine safety and security is the need to feel that our basic wellbeing is not being continually threatened by external circumstances beyond our control. This need is basic for most of us, since our behavior options are likely to be restricted by any major lack of routine safety and security. Other needs that are basic for most humans are easy to imagine from this deficit perspective. Consider never being loved, not belonging, not having enough to eat, etc. To focus on an even greater deficit, a human need is vital if behavior would be impossible if it were not met at all. For instance Shideler (1988, p212) asserts that without competence to do some of what we set out to do, deliberate action is impossible. She calls this the need for adequacy. Without some degree of adequacy, we cannot imagine a place in the world that would enable a person to do anything.
Note: Approximately the same categories of needs are used in Ossorio (2006), but with different terms. Ossorio uses ‘basic needs’ for what we call ‘vital needs’. He uses ‘needs’ or ‘paradigmatic needs’ for what we call basic needs’. He uses ‘trivial needs’ or ‘non-paradigmatic needs’ for what we would call ‘ordinary needs’. I think our locutions would be more in line with ordinary usage.
Altho the want parameter of a behavior description can include meeting needs, and indeed all needs normally give rise to at least an implicit want to meet that need, it would be disheartening to think of our wants only in terms of meeting needs. Our wants must also have hopeful features, such as desires and aspirations. Otherwise the dramaturgical pattern of life is likely to seem nothing more than a grim struggle (as it has seemed to some philosophers: see “The Myth of Sisyphus”, Camus). However desires and aspirations relate to needs in various ways. With unmet needs we may neglect our desires and aspiration or have major problems in realizing them. Also realizing some of our hopes is itself a human need. Moreover many of the ways we classify our needs also relates to desires and aspirations. As the need for adequacy is met, we are likely to go beyond this in a quest for broader and greater competence. Likewise most people eat not only to satisfy a need, but also for highly positive hedonic reasons. In general, associated with most needs, there is the possibility of satisfaction that goes beyond merely meeting that need and that provides opportunities for greater behavior potential and a more positive dramaturgical pattern.
Meeting needs focuses on the lower limit
boundaries of what we want.
Our desires and aspirations relate to wants, many of which are unbounded from
above.
The central need for a person relates to the main conceptual condition for the person concept indicated earlier. This is the need to sense that there is a pattern to one’s life. Merely meeting needs is unlikely to lead to having much of a life. For most humans this central need for a life is both a spiritual need and a spiritual aspiration that can only be met by going beyond itself and other needs to desires and aspirations. How this can happens varies considerably among humans, and altho the need for a spiritual life may be a human need for most humans, there is no widespread agreement on how it is to be met.
Basic Human Needs: Which human needs are basic for a person P may vary considerably, depending both on P’s characteristics and the communities to which P belongs and on P’s statuses within in those communities. A spiritual community is one whose world includes a general perspective on spiritual needs and on the fulfillment of a broad range of human desires and aspirations. This includes not only religious communities, but also many that are not usually classified as religious. If P belongs to any spiritual community or communities, the one that P most closely identifies with is P’s primary spiritual community. In any spiritual community there will be some consensus on which human needs are basic for most members of that community, altho different criteria may be used for persons with different statuses, i.e. some basic human need for adults would not be considered as applicable to infants. Altho there may not be a total consensus on which spiritual needs are basic, we think that there is enough to make the concept of a basic spiritual need useful. Any lack of consensus may be more on the differences on highly individual requirements for meeting needs in this area than on what these needs are.
Spiritual Wants: As one way to expand on spiritual wants, we suggest eight interrelated types that we call {sensible universe, spiritual practices, moral compass, integrated purposes, external support, supernatural safety, ultimate justice, confronting mortality}. We want to stress that these needs are common to most humans, and that this can be a basis for understanding. However people differ on the relative importance of these needs and how they can or should be met. One thing to be understood is that the primary spiritual community to which a person belongs will have a major impact on how a person meets those needs. However a person’s primary spiritual community may also often have a major influence on how a person believes others should meet these needs. This is a major source of spiritual disagreements. These can be handled positively as exemplified by Bob’s attitude. On the other hand it can give rise to intolerance.
Sensible Universe: The broadest and most central spiritual needs are aspects of comprehensive status concerns. Moreover the other spiritual needs could actually be considered as aspects of this one. The core of this concern is a need for some sense of belonging in the greater scheme of things, to have the dramaturgical pattern of ones life be a way of life. Behavior may be possible if the pattern of one’s life seems to be a meaningless farce, but behavior potential in a farce can be is severely limited. However behavior is impossible in an utterly chaotic and unpredictable universe, so each community concerned with a way of life offers a way for making sense of the totality of things. This is the central need for a sensible universe is often met by a comprehensive paradigm (see note below), altho aspects of it are often met by limited paradigms. In the case of pure physicalism, the paradigm consists of some physical initiating event, at least for the universe we are in, plus everything that has been accounted for using physical laws that can be scientifically established, plus an IOU for everything that has not yet been so accounted for. For scripture-based adherents of traditional religions, it consists of everything stated in the chosen scripture plus its implications. For others, it includes a faith that we have and can formulate scientific laws or models that help us make sense of the physical world and its evolution. Moreover we can do something similar in relation to human behavior, even if human behavior is not fully determined.
Since paradigms usually operate in an implicit fashion, most purely spiritual needs are not vital, i.e. behavior is possible without meeting them, altho if unmet, life would be spiritually impoverished. However even an implicit comprehensive paradigm can have an impact on almost anything a person does. For the spiritually oriented person even the most mundane actions connect to spiritual purposes, somewhere up the significance ladder (See the idea of ‘Under the aspect of eternity’ Shideler, 1985, Chapter 2). This partially explains the tendency for many spiritual communities, e.g. the Hasidic community, all monastic orders, to have spiritual concerns penetrate all mundane activities.
Note: A
comprehensive paradigm is one with a set of core beliefs about how things are
and about what can and what must exist. Included in these are beliefs about the
origin of the universe, the nature of reality, and humanity’s place in the
universe. Other beliefs govern acceptable practices for obtaining and verifying
what is and can be known, especially in relation to core beliefs. The world for
most religious communities includes such a paradigm, but a person may also have
a comprehensive paradigm that is not one from a religious community, such as
physicalism. Comprehensive Paradigms on
the Conceptual Papers Section of the above website develops this concept and
its relation to religious communities.
Spiritual
Practices: Images of sages meditating on mountaintops notwithstanding,
hardly any person with a spiritual life goes it alone. Even persons of the
stature of Theresa of Avila and Francis of Assisi had mentors and followers.
One’s spiritual community is the maintainer of spirituality. It also provides
for spiritual practices, and especially for intrinsic ones. An intrinsic
practice is one for which no motivational explanation is called for. Mundane
examples include enjoying a tasty meal, a delightful concert, or a great
massage. Intrinsic practice contrasts with instrumental practice – those
practices done in order to accomplish something else. A person lacking intrinsic
practices has no way of terminating, even for himself, a chain of questions of
the form: “Why did you do that?” Thus intrinsic practices provide a boundary
for chains of motivation. Persons lacking such a boundary are vulnerable to
depression (Bergner, 1998). Intrinsic spiritual practices might include the
singing of hymns or chants, prayer, meditation, or bringing others into the
fold. (What is intrinsic can vary with the individual.)
Moral Compass: Altho different religions have different moral guidelines, all stress moral competence in some form. Moral competence includes ethical competence in dealing with others. It also includes having competence in choosing right actions and in living by other significant values. We can expect this competence to be acquired the same way as any other competence, namely by practice and experience in the practices that call for it. Most communities leverage this experience with some kind of guidance toward right living, e.g. a scripture, a trusted spiritual leader, or some kind of internal revelation, perhaps in meditation or prayer. The moral compass can never solve all problems of choice, but it is important that each person not start from square one in matters moral.
Integrated Purpose: In a mundane sense, saying that life has no purpose is preposterous. We live immersed in an ocean of purposes. It is not the scarcity of purposes that plagues us, but their overabundance and apparently arbitrary character. The basic spiritual need is how to chose among purposes and actions, what to do about our tendency to go in many directions or even collapse in confusion. Altho this need is not vital, failure in meeting this need makes one feel like chaff in the wind. Having some way to chose between purposes is only the basic part of the spiritual need for integrated purposes. To have an enriched behavior potential, we cannot merely accept the purposes we find motivating us. We need to justify and evaluate what we have done, place it within a moral order, judge the extent to which it makes sense. This may not be a basic need, but without something to further integrate our purposes, our behavior potential narrows. The significance ladder from the concept of a behavior description can be used to describe ways in which humans integrate their purposes. What serves this integrated purpose need may not come from a religious community. Being driven to accumulate wealth or power may do. Pure hedonism may do. What most religious communities maintain is that something ultimate is needed for our spiritual wellbeing. They may believe that not only do our purposes need to be integrated, they need to be integrated with integrity, that all the parameters of our behavior need to be in harmony with each other, e.g. purpose with knowledge, competence, performance, etc. Particularly important for integrity is that the upward significance chain from an action be harmonious at every step of the way, all the way to the top, which is where spirituality often comes in.
External Support: Desire outstrips our personal powers. Altho prayer for forgiveness and other religious practices meet safety needs, they also illustrate the need humans feel to connect with a power beyond our own inadequate powers. Altho assistance of a higher power is not the only way to obtain external support, the need for such assistance has been felt in a wide variety of ways. This need may come in the form of coping with overwhelming problems or potential disasters. The common saying ‘there are no atheist in foxholes’ illustrates this. Prayer is also used to help insure the success of specific enterprises and the realization of specific aspirations. Most important it has been deemed by many as essential for having the life and values of communities and humans rooted in the divine will. Without this, many feel that we not only fail, we perish.
Nor is it only the gods who may provide supernatural assistance. A rabbit’s foot may even help. A religious community that denies the existence of the supernatural must have an alternative way to satisfy this external support need. Since a vast number of humans have at times turned to the supernatural for such support, finding a widely acceptable alternative may be difficult.
Supernatural Safety: The concept of the supernatural may be taken in the ordinary way it is used by most people. (For some this seems to mean “lacking a causal, physicalistic, explanation”.) It is evident that doctrine has played a major role in the life of religious communities, and this is one reason why a comprehensive paradigm with a substantive preeminent cosmic version was suggested as a central spiritual need for integrated purposes. However doctrine indicates more than this. For many people there seems to be a spiritual need for detailed certainty about what to believe and what to do about the realm of the spiritual. Especially relevant is what to believe and do about the supernatural. The realm of certainty for the vast majority of humans past and present includes beliefs about the supernatural. Even among those who do not believe in the supernatural, most find supernatural safety by explicitly deny its existence. So we consider it as highly plausible that spiritual needs include some way to deal with the supernatural. Even if this need is not basic for everyone, it certainly been a major concern for many. We illustrate this not as evidence for such a need, nor to assert either the existence or the nonexistence of the supernatural, but in order to better understand its role in communities.
Altho the practice of making animal or human sacrifices has been used to seek supernatural assistance, it even more illustrates a way in which people have tried to satisfy a need for safety from the wrath of the gods. Penance and rites of confession have been used for similar reasons. However the actions of the gods are not the only supernatural activity from which safety has seemed to be needed. Witches have been burned and demons exorcised. Even people who do not believe in such beings may know protection strategies from vampires and werewolves. At a much more mundane level, people may avoid crossing the path of a black cat, take care not to step on a sidewalk crack, know that breaking a mirror causes seven years of bad luck, etc. What child has not felt fear when walking at night past a cemetery, even if claiming that ghosts do not exist?
Ultimate Justice: As a man sows, that also shall he reap. This statement is one expression of the way many think an ultimately just world would be. For anyone who has no doubts that the world is ultimately just, the need for ultimate justice has been met. However casual observations suggest that the world may not be ultimately just. The wicked seem to prosper. The good die young. Etc. From this perspective, it is not so much a need for justice that seems to be involved, but a need to not feel that the world is inherently unjust. Thus a need for ultimate justice can still be met by finding a way to believe that underneath all apparent injustice, justice prevails. This is the way normally taken by traditional monotheistic religions. It is also the way taken by religions whose ontology entails reincarnation. Another way is to downplay the personal significance of injustice. Injustices can be regarded as just one type of hazard among many in an uncertain world, many of which are distressing but tolerable. They can even be taken as challenges, as was recommended by stoic philosophers. Social injustices can be taken as case-by-case problems to be solved rather than as ultimate.
Mortality Confrontation: Intertwined with the needs for external support and safety from the supernatural is an awareness of biological death. Altho we may be able to postpone thinking about our own death, most of us will not be able to avoid thinking about the death of others. The need to cope with the death of loved ones is a spiritual need that no purely temporal institution has yet been able to meet to the satisfaction of most humans. It is one in which religious practices have had a central role from as far back as we know. Awareness of the death of others confronts us with our own biological mortality. What if anything comes after and how does it relate to the life we lived? Consider the concept of reincarnation. Consider the concepts of heaven and hell. The Protestant doctrine of justification by faith and the Catholic sacrament of last rites are indicative of the attitudes that nothing we can do is adequate to insure our safety after our biological death. To cope with this, most humans appeal to some beliefs, even if these tell them to fear nothing for they will cease to exist. Even the affirmation of the beliefs of some religious community can help meet this need. Acting as if this alone is sufficient has been called fire insurance by some whose faith is a more significant part of their life.
Manifest and Actual Wellbeing: Max feels great about his no down payment adjustable
interest loan for a new house, altho the house will soon be worth less than he
paid for it. Jill thinks that her copper mine will fail, being unaware that the
demand for copper is about to dramatically increase sales. Sally says that she
aced the exam, altho she actually failed it. Jim feels that the girl of his
dreams will never be interested in him while she is hoping he will ask her for
a date. In each case there is a disconnect between components of what we will
call a person’s manifest state of wellbeing and the person’s actual state of
wellbeing. Roughly speaking, the state of a person P’s manifest wellbeing
depends on the extent to which P’s wants are currently being met and P’s
aspirations are currently being fulfilled. This normally depends on both
P’s current circumstances and characteristics. Actual wellbeing depends on
current reality constraints that influence P’s potential for maintaining P’s
future wellbeing. While these include future circumstances that may differ
considerably from P’s present ones, they also include P’s current
characteristics that prepare P to meet future circumstances.
Example: Anyone
who knows Max can easily to see that having his new house contributes in a
positive manner to the state of his manifest wellbeing. Without knowledge about
the future, there may be dispute about the extent its relations to his actual
state of wellbeing. However there are some good reasons to raise concerns, especially
if there is reason to predict a downturn in the housing market. Another reason
to have doubts about his actual wellbeing could be his characteristic lack of
prudence in financial matters. Even if the value of his house increases, a
careless attitude towards financial prudence is likely to be a factor that will
not always enable him to meet futures circumstances in a satisfactory manner.
Singer (2008) develops a more precise and detailed
concepts that relate to a person’s overall wellbeing.
Spiritual Wellbeing: P’s spiritual wellbeing relates to having P’s spiritual wants met in an adequate manner. To the extent that P has spiritual life, this will be significant component in P’s wellbeing. Most people with a significant spiritual life would probably not only agree with this, but would also say that a person cannot have highly positive overall state of wellbeing without a highly positive state of spiritual wellbeing. As indicated earlier, spiritual communities provide ways of meeting and fulfilling spiritual needs and aspiration, and thus provide major support towards there members’ spiritual wellbeing. However this is can be a complex matter, and we indicate in the following examples.
Example: Lou and Sue were raised in a religious sect that regards all nonbelievers as damned. Both had a manifest sense of spiritual wellbeing until they went to college. There they encountered teachers and peers that considered their religion as mere superstitions. This undermined Lou’s spiritual wellbeing, and he never returned to the faith. On the other hand, Sue took it as a test that allowed her to enhance her faith for a lifetime. Supposing that this sect has a correct cosmic version, Lou’s actual spiritual wellbeing had never been in a positive state, since he had characteristics that allowed him to loose faith. In contrast, Sue actual state of wellbeing was and remained highly positive. On the other hand, if Sue’s cosmic version is incorrect, it is hard to determine the spiritual wellbeing of either. It depends partially on whether having a correct enough cosmic version has much to do with spiritual wellbeing.
Example:
Example: When
plagued with doubts, Martin Luther went thru a period in which he was in a
negative state of spiritual wellbeing. Later he probably considered this as a
prelude to a significant positive state of both actual and manifest spiritual
wellbeing. Since he was classified as a heretic by his former church, indicates
that they would consider his actual state of wellbeing as damnable. Had they
used the concept of manifest spiritual wellbeing, they might have bemoaned its
apparent positive state as the work of the devil in his attempt to undermine
the church.
Example: Many people would say that a suicide bomber has a false sense of spiritual wellbeing because he actually will be going to Hell, where as he might say that his enemies have a false sense of spiritual wellbeing because are enemies of the one true God and his teachings.
Six Concerns of
Spirituality: Earlier that (Shideler 1992, p33) characterized the spiritual
realm as having {timelessness, ultimates, totality, transcendence, holiness,
boundary conditions} as its main concerns. We now elaborate on these concepts.
Boundary Conditions: ‘Virtually all languages – and with them the concepts with which they are intertwined – provide opportunities for infinite regress in significance’. (“What are you doing by doing that?”), in motivation (“Why did you do/want that?”), in causality (“What caused that?”), in composition (“What are the immediate constituents of that?”), etc.
These opportunities are more than meaningless formalities, witness the habits of children at ages 4 – 5 of plying adults with chains of questions of the sort listed above, with the apparent objective of getting some kind of termination to the regress. Whatever is done to terminate such a regress qualifies as a boundary condition, as does anything that closes off a realm.
It therefore makes sense to ask what a given individual – or community – typically does to terminate a given regress. For example, a regress in motivation (“Why did you do/want that?”) continues through instrumental actions (those taken to fulfill a distinct purpose) and ends with an intrinsic action – one taken for its own sake and for which there would be no point in trying to continue the motivation series past it. (Indeed, that is the definition of an intrinsic action.)
What does all this have to do with spirituality? Once, when I asked a colleague what spirituality was, he answered: “It deals with the big questions.” The notion of a boundary condition helps us to elaborate on that use of “big”. Not all boundary conditions are always the concern of spirituality, but many – those associated with things fundamental, comprehensive, or important – very frequently are.
The prime example is significance. If you ask me why I am writing this, I will answer: “to help popularize some useful, relatively culture-free, concepts for dealing with the realm of spirituality.” If you press the regress until I can go no further, my final answer is likely to reflect my spiritual orientation. Some possibilities are:
“To serve God.” (Theist)
“To educate others as Jesus did.” (Christian)
“For the good of humanity.” (Secular Humanist)
“To help save all sentient beings.” (Buddhist)
“To win the Templeton prize so I can buy a Ferrari.” (Hedonist)
“It just turns me on to work out these fascinating logical relationships.” (Logician )
This last one is different. It shows that a significance series may not terminate in ultimate significance, but in an intrinsic practice. It still reveals something about the personal characteristics of the speaker (pure mathematician?).
Timelessness: The temporal realm is the realm where events occur and states of affairs change. Days come and go. The trees shed their leaves. Etc. Timelessness is a boundary condition on changeability and temporal concerns. This is taken not in the sense of eternal, but rather as “for this, time is irrelevant”. Timelessness in this sense permeates our creative endeavors. Classical music is timeless in the sense that it takes out of a world in which time is relevant. Fairy tales take place in a time that is not a time. That hydrogen and oxygen combine to form water is a principle for which time is irrelevant. What is the relevance of time to the law of the lever, to the conceptual condition that the product of two negative numbers is a positive number, to the relationship between fear and danger, etc?
Ultimates: An ultimate is a boundary condition carrying an additional connotation of initial, final, fundamental, or important, e.g. “ultimate good”, or “ultimate significance” (as in the preceding example). The notion of an ultimate good is a boundary condition for questions about why something is good. For Bob this boundary condition would be that it is according to God’s will, as no explanation beyond this could serve. A once widely used boundary condition was natural law. Ultimate significance of any behavior is any significance that a faithful behavior description would not take further. Ultimate significant need not be spiritual, as the significance chain may not leave the temporal realm. A significance in the spiritual realm will not be ultimate if it is linked to further significance.
The notion of ultimate good comes into play when – in a given situation – there is a conflict between different rules of thumb regarding what is good. For example, for the government the “good” of rescuing failing institutions conflicts with that of keeping taxes and debt low. In such cases one typically appeals to higher rules of thumb – in this case perhaps to utilitarian good: the greatest benefit for the greatest number. For the individual, such boundaries on what is considered good are likely to be provided by her spirituality. Such a boundary for the Christian might be the will of God; for the atheist, the utilitarian principle mentioned above; for the hedonist, greatest present and future pleasure.
Totality: A totality is a boundary condition on inclusion that includes everything else, all there is, nothing more. E.g. the mark of a physicalist is the belief that the physical universe is all there is.
Transcendence: Returning to James, much of his experience in that episode is mundane in the sense of being easily assimilated into his current world. However it also involves getting beyond the mundane, beyond the day-to-day, beyond the confines of his self and his communities; and beyond the confines of his present world. Transcendence is a boundary condition on assimilation in one’s current world, i.e. to transcend involves moving beyond assimilation in one’s current world in a way that leaves that world almost insignificant, at least for the moment.
Holiness: This is a boundary condition on esteem, on that which is valued most highly, is an object of reverence, and ideally would be given special consideration among motivating factors.
Final Comments: Earlier in stating our purpose, we indicated that there are a great variety of spiritual persuasions, interacting in various ways, frequently disagreeing or just talking past each other, and unable even to establish mutually understood questions upon which to disagree about the answers. We hoped that this could be combated, in some degree, with the help of a careful study of the concepts that are used to talk about spiritual life regardless of whose spiritual life it is.
Hopefully the concept such as spirituality and having a spiritual life involving spiritual needs and aspirations is applicable to persons with this great variety of spiritual persuasions in a way that is not preferential. As long as enough fairly ordinary personal information is available, these concepts should enable people of different persuasions to obtain a high level of consensus on such matters as whether a person is having an experience with a spiritual component, the extent to which a person has a spiritual life, a rough estimate about the state of a persons spiritual wellbeing, etc. With somewhat broader information it should be possible to reach consensus on how a person’ characteristics and circumstances relate to a persons’ manifest spiritual wellbeing. For instance, we might expect consensus on the claim that having a primary spiritual community that satisfies a person’s spiritual needs and aspirations makes it unlikely that that person will be drawn into a radically different spiritual community. Moreover agreeing about this could lead to less concern over proselytizing by others and more attention on enhancing the spiritual wellbeing of a community’s members.
Where then does the potential for difference lie? The main answer would seem to be in matters of actual spiritual wellbeing, and this is very likely to involve differences in comprehensive paradigms that adherents of these paradigms consider extremely important. Two main aspects of such paradigms can be relevant, namely their cosmic versions and their practices and related choice principle. Moreover, there are different types of attitudes towards paradigms. For instance, a person can act as if their cosmic version is a convenient myth and their practices are a useful way in providing for their personal wellbeing and the wellbeing of the communities to which they belong. Recall that Kay and Jan indicated attitudes somewhat like this.
Kay: I am inclined to think that given any of the three types of spirituality we mentioned, a person may or may not actually obtain spiritual wellbeing. It may depend more on how the type is lived rather than its type. Of course there is a caveat. I can imagine that there are reality constraints that limit certain types from providing actual wellbeing.
Jan: Altho I
think that pantheism has the greatest potential for actual spiritual wellbeing,
I think that spiritual practices are more significant than beliefs. Recall what
I said earlier about tolerance and cooperation between Christians and Buddhist.
I agree that a person may attain significant spiritual wellbeing thru many
types of spiritual experience.
On the other hand, adherents (like Bob or Roy) act as if their
paradigm is the one that everyone should adopt, altho neither would not use
coercion to accomplish this. Bob’s concern is with actual wellbeing includes an
after life and is crucially dependent on belief in a specific cosmic version.
Unlike some others adherents his evangelical attitudes relate more to
exemplifying his faith than direct too proselytizing. One of his favorite bible
verse is “It is by their fruits that you shall know them.” He at least
implicitly believes that his actual is actual wellbeing enables him to maintain
his manifest wellbeing over the long term and that this is the main way of
leading others to his faith.
References:
Bergner, Ray (1998) ??
Ossorio, Peter (1998) Place.
Ossorio, Peter (2006) The
Behavior of Persons.
Shideler, Mary (1988) Persons,
behavior, and the world.
Shideler, Mary (1992) Spirituality??
Singer, F Richard III (2008) Behavior Potential and Wellbeing Concepts. www.conceptualstudy.org Conceptual Papers Section or Descriptive Psychology Section