Albert Einstein wrote:
"A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, of the manifestations of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty, which are only accessible to our reason in their most elementary forms—it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute the truly religious attitude; in this sense, and in this alone, I am a deeply religious man."
I sometimes like to use the word "spiritual" in a similar sense to the way Einstein uses the word "religious" in this quote. Of course, it is necessary to read between the lines and tell when someone says they are spiritual but that simply means they believe in the supernatural, but can't make up their mind about God. Those "spiritualists" I rebuke. However, I would consider myself "spiritual" in the same sense that Einstein describes here, in the sense that I have a reverent and awestruck wonder for the world around me and the things which we have yet to discover. Yet this feeling does not affect my ability or my motivation to seek out and discover causes for that which we have yet to understand, rather, it actually motivates me more than if I did not have a respect for the grandness of the world around me.
I think that Richard Dawkins hits closest to the mark in one of his more famous quotes:
"We are surrounded by endless forms, most beautiful and most wonderful, and it is no accident, but the direct consequence of evolution by non-random natural selection – the only game in town, the greatest show on Earth."
Of course, he throws in more technical terms between his expression of awe for the world around us (likely out of caution, because otherwise creationists would misquote him), and he is seeing the world through a more biological lens, but his words, if applied to the world and the universe at large, mirror my own thoughts and feelings very closely. And I would call myself "spiritual" because of that. And I do not throw about that word to describe myself without explaining exactly in what sense I mean that word, and whether it influences my belief in anything supernatural, which of course it doesn't. My "spirit" then simply refers to the melting pot of emotions contained within my mental being, or can refer to the mental toughness or freedom of thought and joyous expression of which I am capable. Used in this manner, the word "spirit" lacks any implications of the supernatural in the exact same way that saying Aretha Franklin sings R-E-S-P-E-C-T with "soul" does not imply that some essence of her being survives the personal cataclysm of death.
In short, context matters enormously, and clarification is almost always needed when discussing with theists or other "religious" or "spiritual" claimants what one means when one says they are "spiritual". I think that it is important to stake a claim, even if only a partial one, over these terminologies. I wouldn't recommend starting with "religious" because it is too much of a loaded word. But for starters, I would say that claiming atheistic spirituality definitely is a positive thing. It would help dispell the stigma and stereotype that Atheists are emotionless machines of logical reasoning and harsh scientific fact-analyzing, cold acolytes promoting the dehumanization of the entire world. Simply defending our own domain of ownership over this phrase will help the world see that Atheists are just as human as the rest of the world. And why shouldn't we be able to enjoy beautiful language to describe our experience of the world? Just because our aesthetic pleasure and appreciation for the little things in life comes from our accurate perception of reality instead of a distorted dream world does not mean that we are not entitled to it just as much as those who ascribe to a supernatural reality! Moreover, as intellectuals, our perceptions can offer an even GREATER appreciation than the theist or supernaturalist is capable of. A distorted worldview will only offer a narrowly defined understanding and therefore a one-dimensional (yet somehow fervent) respect for the better things in life. Yet an informed worldview opens up so much more, and allows one to find meaning in so much more, even in the little things, as was the case with Richard Feynman:
“I have a friend who's an artist and has sometimes taken a view which I don't agree with very well. He'll hold up a flower and say "look how beautiful it is," and I'll agree. Then he says "I as an artist can see how beautiful this is but you as a scientist take this all apart and it becomes a dull thing," and I think that he's kind of nutty. First of all, the beauty that he sees is available to other people and to me too, I believe. Although I may not be quite as refined aesthetically as he is ... I can appreciate the beauty of a flower. At the same time, I see much more about the flower than he sees. I could imagine the cells in there, the complicated actions inside, which also have a beauty. I mean it's not just beauty at this dimension, at one centimeter; there's also beauty at smaller dimensions, the inner structure, also the processes. The fact that the colors in the flower evolved in order to attract insects to pollinate it is interesting; it means that insects can see the color. It adds a question: does this aesthetic sense also exist in the lower forms? Why is it aesthetic? All kinds of interesting questions which the science knowledge only adds to the excitement, the mystery and the awe of a flower. It only adds. I don't understand how it subtracts.”
I believe that instead of ostracizing the words "religious" and "spiritual", we should embrace them, but change their meaning. Make them our own. Because if we reject those words, we alienate those of us who are NOT scientists, technical experts, or advocates of reason. We will alienate those of us who are artists, dancers, musicians, performers. We will estrange poets, writers, freethinkers, people whose greatest power comes from the pen and not from the sword. And if we limit ourselves in our expression of the very media we rely on so heavily to speak out against the burden on humanity which religion is, then we cripple ourselves in that pursuit. Moreover, in doing so, we reinforce the negative stereotypes which have plagued Atheists throughout history, stereotypes which are still an integral part of the ridicule and prejudice against Atheists today, in our current highly vocal political movement. Just as we do not seek to euthanize the people who are religious in today's day and age in order to create an Atheistic haven tomorrow, we should not want to refuse association with words like spiritual or religious (though for the time being, as I said earlier, I think the word "religious" is still too potent to be used in our favor) as long as we change the meaning, and INFORM that the way we use it is different than they use it. It is a lot harder to fight against us if we use the same words as them, even if we use them differently. And come to think of it, that's a little like religion........... when others believe in God a little differently, various religions will claim superiority........ but they are all the same - misguided. If we use the same words, but differently, then they will have less of a definitive reason for hating us. Yes, we will probably never rid ourselves of religious prejudice until we get rid of religion, but at least we will be a very positive step in the right direction. One of the best things we can do right now, at the present moment, is to do whatever we can to break stereotypes and shrill bigotry, and THEN we can access the reason and logic of those people, whereas before their reason and logic was clouded by intolerance and stubborn refusal to listen to heathens.
Hopefully, eventually, as belief in the supernatural dissipates into the void of history, the word "religion" becomes synonymous with "fairy tale" for EVERY member of the human race, not just the rational ones. And hopefully we may someday be able to use the words "religious" and "spiritual" to describe moods, feelings, and emotions instead of our worldviews. When that day comes, we will truly be free from the shadow of the supernatural and the irrational.
It will be glorious.
