Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
V. I. Dahl calls spirituality all the mental and moral forces of a person, his mind and will. And such an understanding is close to me. That is, here, in addition to agreeing with moral norms, there is also a mind and a will. I think that thanks to the mind and will, a person is able to accumulate wealth in his soul, which he can share with others. Hence, it turns out that spirituality is a broader concept, but nevertheless includes the moral principle.�
In general, perhaps, we should not put an equal sign between spirituality and morality. However, we can say that morality is the basis of spirituality. A moral person wants to bring good to people, and a highly spiritual person also has the opportunity to give something to people, giving them a piece of his spiritual wealth.
Not if you don't identify spirituality or morality with something transcendent.
Spiritual – conditioned by non-material values.
Moral – conditioned by group” generally binding ” norms.
No. For example, the spiritual may not coincide with the moral. For example, suicide is traditionally considered supposedly immoral in European society, but if, for example, one person considers suicide to be a very spiritual act and does not consider it immoral. This means that morality and spirituality are different things. Spirituality is the opposite of greed and greed, just as faith is the opposite of unbelief.
Here – you don't need to ask, but agree on the terms. As with most philosophical questions, not even purely terminological ones.
For me, a subject who draws uncritically spiritual nourishment from a single source (it is almost an object, not a subject-in the spiritual sense, an object of nurturing) is a spiritually disabled person, a kind of alternative-gifted spirit. �By definition! I'd really rather not eat any suspicious fruit (from the Tree of Knowledge, for example) at all.
But this is for me. For you, it may be “the only true spiritual life.” �What can you do. And here we cannot agree on the terms, here let us agree on the fact of our fundamental, fundamental disagreement!
Okay. �Nevertheless. Spirituality to some extent includes ethics and moral issues. включает As the smallest part of its foundation includes. Spirituality is immeasurably broader! �This is not the same thing at all.
Only if we talk about the carriers of a certain morality within the framework of one spiritual movement. For example, Christian morality. We can only talk about the existence of a causal relationship. That is, the root cause – the spiritual, leads, as a consequence ,to the formation of the moral, within certain groups .
If we consider a certain society that includes only atheists, then, in their format, there is no place for the spiritual. Spiritual in their environment – “a unit not from our community “(quote from “Comedy Club”). Some elements of their moral character may have misleading names: the spirit of equality, fraternity, justice, and even the spirit of victory. But, in this particular case, it has nothing to do with the truly spiritual, just as atheism has nothing to do with the soul.