What is a spiritual experience?

[Rivendale]

Please stop. This is getting worse. Almost to the point of revulsion. You absolutely can not equate disabled people integrating with mainstream society with a spiritual realm. You have no evidence that these adaptive strategies are parallel to a spiritual foggy lens. It is offensive and horrific to all the people who have disabled kids.

[Gadianton]

As I think about spiritual autism...

Maybe you should call it spiritual neurodivergence instead?

[MG 2.0]

As I think about spiritual autism...

Maybe you should call it spiritual neurodivergence instead?

OK. For the sake of keeping the peace I can go with that.

Regards,
MG

[Gadianton]

In the latest model, people literally are born and hardwired Catholics, or Mormons, or JWs, or Mayan Priests and they need to find the community that hits their spiritual resonance frequency. Are they also born Lakers fans?

Psychology may explain why a person might feel more comfortable in one faith or another at least to some degree, or why they don't like vegetables or they do like sports. Extreme cases make it very clear. If a person is literally diagnosed a sociopath -- actually really 'neuro divergent' -- and they claim not to feel the spirit in Mormonism, is MG going to override that and say, "oh no, it's really an unseen spiritual dimension at work, maybe the Catholic church will work better?" But what happens when a sociopath does claim to feel the spirit, does MG accept it at face value? I've shared this story before, but there was a guy from my home ward who bore the most shocking testimonies you've ever heard (and shocking testimonies aren't hard to come by in Mormonism). I doubt MG would doubt his testimony as he stood at the pulpit, but, years later after moving into the ward, when he's thrown in prison for running a Ponzi scheme and fleecing several ward members among many others, MG might pause.

MG mentions the influence of evil spirits, but, in a world with the invention of psychology, there aren't many Christians out there so over-the-top that they attribute schizophrenia attributes to demonic possession. My point is, MG for the most part is unlikely to assert his spiritual salt or pepper to explain the faith choices of people when extensive psychological profiling is in already in play. It would be god-of-the-gaps reasoning to explain what is left over. But that's not his intent, I don't think, I think his intent is to be nice and throw people a bone who don't believe like he does. (while still groping for a way to make Mormonism the only true religion)

While psychology might be wrong, it does provide an explanation. The spiritual taste is a non-explanation to hand-wave or validate whatever it we see. It's like creationism. If a person leaves one church and joins another, then all MG can say is that person must taste the spirit in a different way. In actuality, the person might have been a serial killer looking for a better pool of victims, or the person might have had a bad business deal with a prominent community member and is starting fresh elsewhere. A person may think some Bible verse is explained better by another church, and it has nothing to do with "feeling" per se; the person simply thinks this other church interprets the Bible more accurately and is willing to part ways with a more comfortable situation and go where the Bible leads.

Really, it's a way to be polite and say, "to each their own" without delving deeper than that, and I think that's only to deflect against the accusations of being disrespectful to how other people feel.

To cap this off, the "salt" argument isn't meant to justify relativism as MG is doing, relativism marks the collapse of the argument. BKP had no intention of ever justifying the faith of someone outside of Mormonism. Generally, the folks advancing this kind of argument keep it very simple in order to avoid the obvious logical holes that lead to the relativism that MG is embracing. Even though Descartes had multiple steps to get to God, I think the "god sense" people take Descartes "I think therefore I am" and try to work that as a model just a little bit in order to get that same certain, incommunicable, knowledge of God that no atheist debater on YouTube can question.

[MG 2.0]

In the latest model, people literally are born and hardwired Catholics, or Mormons, or JWs, or Mayan Priests and they need to find the community that hits their spiritual resonance frequency. Are they also born Lakers fans?

I’m assuming you are referring to my neurodivergent model. But you have it wrong. People may be born into a given system of belief and/or practice but that doesn’t mean they are “hardwired” to the spiritual inclinations and accepted reception/manifestations of the ‘spirit’ within those communities. Mormons, Catholics, JWs, Mayan Priests, or a Lakers fan community.

It’s more of an ‘acquired taste’.

This allows for variation and recognition that folks are neurodivergent and are going to respond to a communities spiritual practices in different ways. If a person desires to be a part of any community they will need to adjust and find modalities that offer them a degree of connection and acceptance within that community. Some fake it and others actually find that they over time respond to the ‘truth claims’ of that community in a positive way and find that they experience degrees of conviction, belonging, and happiness within that community.

That can happen whether one chooses Mormonism, or whatever else that floats one’s boat.

Psychology may explain why a person might feel more comfortable in one faith or another at least to some degree, or why they don't like vegetables or they do like sports. Extreme cases make it very clear. If a person is literally diagnosed a sociopath -- actually really 'neuro divergent' -- and they claim not to feel the spirit in Mormonism…

Sociopaths are neurodivergent but within a separate category. This category of individuals are treated differently because they may cause harm to others or create mayhem. I think that Kripal would recognize and allow for neurodivergence that is ‘off the charts’ while at the same time recognizing that even for these individuals they are experiencing things ‘as they really are’.

…is MG going to override that and say, "oh no, it's really an unseen spiritual dimension at work, maybe the Catholic church will work better?"

No. Again, this category of neurodivergence is treated and looked at differently because of the harm they may cause to others and/or their behaviors, thoughts, and actions do not fit within societal norms. These neurodivergent people would gravitate towards others with similar placements along the neurodivergent spectrum.

In the case of the Mayan Priests they control the societal norm. Were there neurodivergent people within that community who found that they didn't ‘feel the spirit’ as it was manifest within that community? I would think so. Each community of whatever type will have neurodivergent members, including the LDS Church.

But what happens when a sociopath does claim to feel the spirit, does MG accept it at face value?

Lines have to be drawn within a society/community/church that seeks a balance between ‘spiritual practice’ and possible harm that can come to the larger community through the actions of a sociopath. But again, that doesn’t mean that the outlier isn’t experiencing that which is reality based to them. Or at least possibly so. Each case would need to be evaluated on its own merits.

I've shared this story before, but there was a guy from my home ward who bore the most shocking testimonies you've ever heard (and shocking testimonies aren't hard to come by in Mormonism). I doubt MG would doubt his testimony as he stood at the pulpit…

I’ve heard some ‘interesting’ testimonies along the way in my years being a member of the church. I don’t give ‘personal’ credence to those that I believe are way out there. Back to Kripal…I can believe that you really believe it but I don’t have to believe your belief. I can respect, however, that you believe it and ‘go with that’ without condemnation.

…but, years later after moving into the ward, when he's thrown in prison for running a Ponzi scheme and fleecing several ward members among many others, MG might pause.

I’m not appreciative of your characterization of me as a ‘country bumpkin’.

MG mentions the influence of evil spirits, but, in a world with the invention of psychology, there aren't many Christians out there so over-the-top that they attribute schizophrenia attributes to demonic possession.

Including myself.

My point is, MG for the most part is unlikely to assert his spiritual salt or pepper to explain the faith choices of people when extensive psychological profiling is in already in play.

True. Anomalies exist. They do within most species within the animal kingdom. Outliers. They are treated differently for the health and well being of the larger community.

It would be god-of-the-gaps reasoning to explain what is left over. But that's not his intent, I don't think, I think his intent is to be nice and throw people a bone who don't believe like he does. (while still groping for a way to make Mormonism the only true religion)

My intent is to see and observe the world as it is not the way I would like it to be. Honestly, I think that is why many disbelievers have a hard time. They want to create a world ‘in their own image’ and are unwilling to let God do his work. Messiness and all.

While psychology might be wrong, it does provide an explanation.

Yes.

The spiritual taste is a non-explanation to hand-wave or validate whatever it we see.

I disagree. I think we have to accept the world as it is. No excuses. And no need to ‘wipe away’ religious belief. It is part of the human condition. Humans are neurodivergent along a spectrum. We need to allow for that within religious systems and beliefs while at the same time realizing that there will be outliers that might pose a danger to themselves and others.

It's like creationism. If a person leaves one church and joins another, then all MG can say is that person must taste the spirit in a different way.

Here we go again. “It’s like”. Is it? Why do you have a problem with spiritual neurodivergency?

In actuality, the person might have been a serial killer looking for a better pool of victims, or the person might have had a bad business deal with a prominent community member and is starting fresh elsewhere.

Yep. That happens. Not a good thing. Action needs to be taken to resolve issues with ‘outliers’.

A person may think some Bible verse is explained better by another church, and it has nothing to do with "feeling" per se; the person simply thinks this other church interprets the Bible more accurately and is willing to part ways with a more comfortable situation and go where the Bible leads.

Treats ago there was an LDS family (mom was a professor at BYU), son on a mission, that did just that. I can’t remember their name off hand. It happens. We ought to then wish them well.

Really, it's a way to be polite and say, "to each their own" without delving deeper than that, and I think that's only to deflect against the accusations of being disrespectful to how other people feel.

There is always going to be that component. Warranted or not. All we can do is do what we can on an individual/community level to alleviate this from being a major problem. It’s a human problem that’s always going to be there to some extent. Humans doing dumb stuff and all that.

We see that on message boards. Being truly respectful of others and their beliefs is a goal with achieving.

To cap this off, the "salt" argument isn't meant to justify relativism as MG is doing, relativism marks the collapse of the argument.

Again, I’m not sure why you have a difficult time accepting that we are all neurodivergent along a spectrum?

BKP had no intention of ever justifying the faith of someone outside of Mormonism.

I can’t speak for what BKP either believed or didn’t believe at granular level in regards to what you are accusing him of. Are you the judge?

Generally, the folks advancing this kind of argument keep it very simple in order to avoid the obvious logical holes that lead to the relativism that MG is embracing.

And again, as I said earlier, I think it is imperative that we look at the world as it is, not the way WE would like or wish it to be. That being the case, relativism plays a part.

Even though Descartes had multiple steps to get to God, I think the "god sense" people take Descartes "I think therefore I am" and try to work that as a model just a little bit in order to get that same certain, incommunicable, knowledge of God that no atheist debater on YouTube can question.

You can question all you want.

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

I disagree. I think we have to accept the world as it is. No excuses.

Ok.

And no need to ‘wipe away’ religious belief. It is part of the human condition.

And you just violated your first statement. "religious belief" is not a part of the human condition unless virtually every human being has it. That is not the case.

Humans are neurodivergent along a spectrum. We need to allow for that within religious systems and beliefs...

No, that's not necessary. Just acknowledge not all humans will believe in your religious system, or possibly in any religious system. Just as not all believe in ufos, imaginary forest creatures, and aliens who currently stalk this planet.

[MG 2.0]

I disagree. I think we have to accept the world as it is. No excuses.

Ok.

And no need to ‘wipe away’ religious belief. It is part of the human condition.

And you just violated your first statement. "religious belief" is not a part of the human condition unless virtually every human being has it. That is not the case.

Humans are neurodivergent along a spectrum. We need to allow for that within religious systems and beliefs...

No, that's not necessary. Just acknowledge not all humans will believe in your religious system, or possibly in any religious system. Just as not all believe in ufos, imaginary forest creatures, and aliens who currently stalk this planet.

Inquiry: Is religious belief considered to be part of the human condition?

Religious belief is certainly a widespread and significant aspect of the human experience. Throughout history and across cultures, humans have sought meaning, purpose, and comfort in religious beliefs and practices.

While not all individuals are religious, and the specific beliefs and practices of religious people vary widely, the impulse towards religious belief seems to be a fundamental part of the human condition. Some scholars argue that this impulse is rooted in the human brain, which is wired to seek patterns and explanations for the world around us.

Others see religious belief as a way for humans to cope with the fear of death, the search for meaning and purpose, and the desire for connection with something greater than ourselves. Whatever the reason, religious belief has played a central role in human culture and continues to be an important aspect of many people's lives today.

Pi A.I.

I’ll go with that.

Thanks for your response.

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

Ok.
And you just violated your first statement. "religious belief" is not a part of the human condition unless virtually every human being has it. That is not the case.

No, that's not necessary. Just acknowledge not all humans will believe in your religious system, or possibly in any religious system. Just as not all believe in ufos, imaginary forest creatures, and aliens who currently stalk this planet.

Inquiry: Is religious belief considered to be part of the human condition?

Religious belief is certainly a widespread and significant aspect of the human experience. Throughout history and across cultures, humans have sought meaning, purpose, and comfort in religious beliefs and practices.

While not all individuals are religious, and the specific beliefs and practices of religious people vary widely, the impulse towards religious belief seems to be a fundamental part of the human condition. Some scholars argue that this impulse is rooted in the human brain, which is wired to seek patterns and explanations for the world around us.

Others see religious belief as a way for humans to cope with the fear of death, the search for meaning and purpose, and the desire for connection with something greater than ourselves. Whatever the reason, religious belief has played a central role in human culture and continues to be an important aspect of many people's lives today.

Pi A.I.

I’ll go with that.

Thanks for your response.

Regards,
MG

You are still asking A.I. leading questions, and thinking you are getting something like accurate or knowledgeable statements back? Please, educate yourself.

... "religious belief" is not a part of the human condition unless virtually every human being has it. That is not the case.

... Just acknowledge not all humans will believe in your religious system, or possibly in any religious system. Just as not all believe in ufos, imaginary forest creatures, and aliens who currently stalk this planet.

[MG 2.0]

You are still asking A.I. leading questions, and thinking you are getting something like accurate or knowledgeable statements back?

You are trolling and adding nothing to the conversation.

Please add something useful or simply let the conversation run its natural course.

Need a model?

Look at Gadianton’s and my recent posts.

Regards,
MG

[I Have Questions]

A.I. responses should be banned from the forum in my opinion. They lack references and sources and…

Using A.I. for answers has several weaknesses:

1. **Accuracy**: A.I. may provide incorrect or outdated information, as it relies on existing data and patterns.

2. **Context**: It can struggle with nuanced questions or complex contexts, leading to misunderstandings or oversimplifications.

3. **Bias**: A.I. can reflect biases present in its training data, potentially leading to skewed or unfair answers.

4. **Lack of Depth**: While A.I. can summarize information, it might lack the depth of analysis that human experts can provide.

5. **Dependence**: Over-reliance on A.I. can reduce critical thinking and problem-solving skills in individuals.

6. **Transparency**: A.I.'s decision-making processes can be opaque, making it hard to understand how certain conclusions are reached.

7. **Ethics**: Concerns about privacy and data security arise when using A.I., especially with sensitive information.

These factors should be considered when seeking information from A.I..

(Chat GPT)

We can see a demonstration of #5 in most of MG 2.0’s responses