schrade at akrobiz.com
Sun Jul 25 11:12:45 CDT 2004
Catching up on some old posts.....
> I've been meaning to change my address on the list for a while, but couldn't
> think of anything suitable. It's time to drop the "ped" reference and move
> on. I believe I asked ML for suggestions and he referred me to Scott, who
> had come up with his handle. No luck there.
Sorry, Jim. I must've missed your request. But I like your choice of 'Naked I.'
'Naked the First.' Gives you a Royal feel. Like Charles I. Very good.
> I'm not trying to sterilize it. I'm just trying to include that first man
> who ever looked up at the stars and said "How wonderful they are! What do
> you suppose makes them turn like that?" It takes us back to a time when
> science, religion, mathematics and philosophy were all the same and there
> was no division between.
That made me think of the rather cliche' phrase, "a sense of wonder." But
that implies a questioning. Many times spiritual feelings are peaceful & tranquil,
& don't include pondering & heavy thought. When I was lying on a warm
rock ledge in the midst of the Grand Canyon with my eyes closed, I wasn't
"wondering" about anything. I was just grooving (!) on the feeling of being a
tiny little creature on a big-ass, beautiful planet.
Point: There are many shades to the word "spiritual." And I think Pete's
writing shows not only a *religious* sense of spirituality but also a humanistic
one, as well.
"Happy Jack" has a humanistic spirituality to it. So does "You Better, You
I know what you're saying: "But what kind of deep, world-view thoughts do
*those* songs contain?" They *don't* contain any such thoughts. But they
*do* contain "spiritual snapshots," if you will, of the human interaction & human
variety which has come to evolve on this planet. And truly, that *is* meaningful.
That's Pete's humanistic spirituality. One can find spirituality - beauty - in many
> Any definition that does not relate to the supernatural and divine or tries
> to include purely observational experiences.
But it's those "observations" that get us thinking & questioning in the first place.
In retrospect, I may have been incorrect when I implied that looking up at the
stars & just thinking they're pretty doesn't constitute a "spiritual" moment.
It's those kind of initial observations that begin the process leading to the
deeper spiritual feelings. (Speaking of "deeper," it's really starting to get
"deep" in *here,* isn't it?)
> Right, but originally man's only explanations were that *beings* had put
> those things there.
I think it's safe to say different early culture's had different explanations, not
all of them being that the stars were placed in the sky by beings.
> If anything, we've been getting less spiritual.
Here you're using "spiritual" as synonymous with "belief in the supernatural."
Am I reading you right? And if you're saying, as a society, we're believing
less & less in the supernatural, that's debatable. Of course it fluctuates over
the decades, & each area & culture is different, but current research shows
that, on the whole, more Americans believe in the supernatural than did in
the recent past.
A 2001 survey found that 54% of Americans believe in "psychic or spirit-
ual (there's that word again!) healing." 50% believe in "ESP." 41% believe
in "possession by the devil." And 38% believe in "ghosts."
And well over 90% believe in "God" - which *is* a supernatural belief.
> I agree. The way we live tends to remove us from nature, and we begin to
> see the world as man-made and to lose touch with our origins, and with
> matters of the spirit.
Here you're using "spirit" as almost synonymous with nature. Can we think
of any Pete songs dealing with nature in a spiritual sense? I'm surprised
he doesn't write more about sailing. I mean, he uses a lot of water references,
we know, but he must encounter spiritual moments while sailing, don't ya'
> > Then how are secular humanists to discuss their spiritual feelings?
> I don't think they have spiritual feelings. I think they have deep,
> profound, wonderful feelings that are purely non-spiritual.
Not true! Most secular humanists trust science for their world view. And
Carl Sagan once said:
"Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source
Unless you qualify "spirituality" as only having to do with the supernatural,
you can't claim that secular humanists & the like don't have spiritual
> I don't think spiritual seeking has to be after God in a religious or super-
> natural context.
Hey! We agree!
- SCHRADE in Akron
"My last vestige of 'hands off religion' respect disappeared in the smoke
& choking dust of September 11, 2001, followed by the 'National Day of
Prayer,' when prelates & pastors urged people of mutually incompatible
faiths to hold hands, united in homage to the very force that caused the
problem in the first place."
- Richard Dawkins
More information about the TheWho