RE: Are We Really Living Our Own Lives?
"how many people are finding others who share the importance of truth and morality with each other?"
I'd say quite a lot actually, in fact probably 99% of humanity. There are all the religions for a start - though obviously they all have completely different ideas of "truths" and vastly differing moralities. Your post to me, reads like one of those " wise" religious leaders claiming to be "knowledgeable" and that have found the one truth...... proselytizing for their own particular brand. I would count myself as one very interested in the nature of reality and find Science to be my guide, rather than "Spirituality" or "Alchemy"and such.
"Define what you are trying to say by the term "universal truth"."
How about you define some of your own terms?
Define Spirituality.......
Define lower and higher Consciousness in scientific terms........and explain how the latter is achieved?
You are apparently essentially saying most people are too selfish to achieve the level of consciousness that you have, so we have to act like you in order to correct this. The arrogance is astounding.
As you are claiming to be using scientific tools, such as logic, then please explain in what way this is any kind of philosophy and why it is any different from any other religious/spiritual sales pitch? If you cannot, then may I suggest that this post be more correctly tagged as Religion/Spirituality, rather than Philosophy. Thanks
I put spiritual in quotes because its so ambiguous, but I could. I'm not sure you're actually interested though give then tone of your argument. "Spiritual" = moral. "Spirituality" = morality. "Spiritually" = morally". Anyone who believes they can be "spiritual" (whatever that means to them) while doing harm, is a fool. I don't care about any of the other definitions as they are based in belief.
You can say everyone in humanity is concerned with truth and morality, passively, by default. Not actively to learn and understand it more and figure out what is wrong around us so that the quality and condition of our lives can be improved.
You also attempt to denigrate the meaning of the post by associating alchemy and whatever you think "spirituality" means as hogwash without any substantive meaning in reality. I used the terms in quotes, did that allude your understanding of why I quoted them? I can't be repeating every single definition from previous work in all new work.
Most people don't care about truth or morality, actively, and simply passively think they already have what they need, and don't go out seeking it. I know this, because I live around people. I try to get people to care for truth and actively learn. Zip. "They know it all" is how they act, not me, lol, how silly of you to think the opposite. I recognize I need to learn, and do so, while others don't want to. Again this demonstrates your general attitude. You already viewed me poorly from not understanding words I used, and then proceeded with your attack. Nice try. Have good one. Peace.
Let's ignore tone shall we? I specifically asked about what "spirituality"means to you, because everyone seems to give it different meanings. So, spirituality is equivalent to morality - that's your definition? I do wonder why you didn't just use the word morality though, if that's what you meant? So reading your first paragraph, you are saying that anybody who has a moral code that permits harm does not in fact have a moral code....right? You further state that these non-moral codes can be dismissed as they are based on "belief".
The problem with this line of reasoning is that your position is an "Absolutist" moral philosophy, most commonly adopted by the religious, people of "faith" or in other words a "belief" system - the grounds you just dismissed your "non-moral" philosophies on.
These other philosophic positions that do permit harm ( in order to do the least harm to others, prevent even greater harm etc) are more of a "Stoic" position. This is the opposite of the "Absolutist"belief system you are advocating.
"You already viewed me poorly from not understanding words I used, and then proceeded with your attack. "
Excuse me, I have not attacked you and it would have been clearer had you said what you actually meant ie morality, rather than a word that can apparently mean anything anybody wants it to. Peace to you too.