Meditating atheist?

[psyche]

I was wondering if any atheists practise meditation? Specifically trancendental meditation? It is proven to be good for relaxing, health, memory and many other things, so it's a good habit and could aid intellectual side too. But the potential problem that I see with this is that atheist might be fixated in the concept of human being as a mere biological organism. Especially if the method of meditation is rather transcendental than intense focus on given object/quality. Atheists tend to emphasize the fact that many people are blinded by religion, or miss something in life due to the irrational belief system they are basing their existence on. Is this something that atheists miss because they are unable to take seriously what they experience for a prolonged time?

Reputation Comments on this post:

Great question, good discussion.

[RaverHippie]

Atheism for me is not need a religion to gain self-security and to aid in dealing with death and morals. I'm able to generate ideas governing all of those topics without the need for an influx of religion. I don't see my atheism as an attack on religion or view those under the influence of religion as less. There isn't really a better in this instance.
When it comes to meditation it's a great tool for centering relaxation and concentration but I couldn't say I've encountered something transcendent about meditation.

[psyche]

Originally Posted by RaverHippie

Atheism for me is not need a religion to gain self-security and to aid in dealing with death and morals. I'm able to generate ideas governing all of those topics without the need for an influx of religion. I don't see my atheism as an attack on religion or view those under the influence of religion as less. There isn't really a better in this instance.
When it comes to meditation it's a great tool for centering relaxation and concentration but I couldn't say I've encountered something transcendent about meditation.

I hear you. I was wondering this because some forms of meditation are tied to mysticism and spirituality. I don't expect transcendental meditation to be the favourite form of meditation for those inclined to atheism, but they might find power of relaxation and concentration in more centered forms of meditation.

[b3ni]

SWIM's an atheist, and SWIM practices mantra meditation, which I believe is similar to, if not the same as trancendental meditation. SWIM believes that just because you do not believe in a God does not mean you cannot be spiritual. SWIM tends to pray every night, not so much to thank god, but more as a way of reflecting on the day SWIM has had.

[psyche]

Originally Posted by b3ni

SWIM's an atheist, and SWIM practices mantra meditation, which I believe is similar to, if not the same as trancendental meditation. SWIM believes that just because you do not believe in a God does not mean you cannot be spiritual. SWIM tends to pray every night, not so much to thank god, but more as a way of reflecting on the day SWIM has had.

Nice to see there are atheists that enjoy the full spectrum of conscious experience. SWIMs personal experience has left him a bit pessimistic about atheists; some combine atheism with rational and closeminded attitude. Thanks for showing SWIM they don't represent all atheists

[b3ni]

A friend of mine, who is what I call a 'religious atheist' because he preaches atheism, also meditates. Although he does not use the Mantra technique, as he says "How can the mind be free if you are focussing on a mantra?" Mathematicians hey?

[Gradient]

Extremely interesting thread. Please forgive my over-interest...

Meditation, yoga, focused breathing, and even Tai Chi in my experience are all similar efforts at executing an extremely arduous endeavor: exerting conscious control over the nervous system's functions, rather than passively responding to the state of the body given its surroundings. During all of these, there's a tremendous focus on the breath with the direct consequence of an increase in perceived calmness. I think this has two obvious physiological consequences.

First, when engaging in daily drudgery, I'm surprised at how irregular breathing can become. I often find myself realizing that I haven't taken a full, deep breath in minutes. Upon the realization, I experience a massive sigh of relief, and begin breathing more regularly. This generates a tremendous sense of calm control, and I firmly believe that practicing the above-described activities is capable of entraining one's respiratory circuits to operate with more consistent rhythms (oscillations of alpha-motor neuron activation from the cerebellum). Since cerebellar oscillators can be, and are regularly, entrained by motor signals from the primary motor cortex, this is extremely plausible. In my opinion, it's only a matter of time before this is verified with simultaneous EMG & fMRI recordings.

Second, the brain isn't really structured to maintain one conscious focus for an extended period of time, as glorified a capability as it is. This makes evolutionary sense; having a dynamic brain will render reaction times shorter, and allow for more rapid adaptation to environmental dynamism. However, society currently favors the ability to focus for extended periods of time on one to a few factors. One of the more interesting cognitive practices of meditation and yoga is the fact that the mind is supposed to be made to 'gaze at thought processes', or 'passively allow thoughts to flow'. Similarly, Tai Chi recruits tremendous focus to learn and execute motor dynamics accurately while maintaining a regular oscillatory breathing pattern.
In all of these circumstances, the forebrain is exerting substantial dominance over subcortical circuit signals - a relatively 'recent' evolutionary development. The primary neurological difference between ourselves and our genetic ancestors is a notably enlarged forebrain; our ancestors were far more reactionary in nature, and while they certainly behaved with more goal-directed actions than their organic peers, humans express a revolutionary sense of planning and prediction due to the sophistication of the forebrain. The consequences of this evolutionary step are innumerable, but arguably most significant among them is the development of complex society. Existing in contemporary society presents an altogether different set of parameters requiring adaptation to ensure survival and desirable living circumstances than our ancestors could ever have conceived of. Accordingly, our bodies and primitive subcortical regions of the brain evolved to express urges and compulsions that aren't congruent with the most strategic in the context of society because they evolved under less social conditions, subserving behaviors that would be more advantageous in less predictable and wilder conditions.
When executing such focused behaviors, individuals are quite literally training their forebrain in its capacity to suppress distraction from valued thought processes. With practice, individuals will become less likely to be distracted by sensory stimuli like noises, movements, smells, etc - and cultivate the ability to dedicate thoughts as desired. Major circuits mediating this capability are the mesolimbic and mesocortical dopamine pathways, which provide a theoretical basis for the use of psychomotor stimulants in treating attention deficits.

At no point does any kind of ethereal energy or spiritual force enter consciousness, whatsoever. As Donald Hebb's axiom states, "neurons that fire together wire together". When practicing meditation and other calming behaviors, one is consciously firing specific circuits of neurons together. Over time and with practice, these neurons will begin to 'wire together', or form synaptic contacts, thereby fostering the calm and controlled states attained by such practices. While an unnamable, intangible, spiritual force might serve a loosely-describable function in some individuals, I believe the value in these behaviors is purely neurological in nature - and substantial to boot.

Reputation Comments on this post:

	Interesting post
	Good addition to the thread

[RaverHippie]

I've found myself more accepting of the secular texts relating to buddhism since they're from many of the same historical figures in Tibet, as I've encountered them, specifically the Shambala warrior's guide (probably not labeling that correctly.) It's more of a guide to increased awareness, acceptance, and love for things so that one can live harmoniously in everyday life filled with turmoil and human societal problems.

[RaverHippie]

Fascinating post in all respects. The conclusions made sense about consciously affecting the rhythms of cerebellum activity.

I always found immense interest in the ability to overrule the impulsive and emotionally volatile portions of my brain. I grew up seeing the difficulties people had when they couldn't keep their emotions in check so I thought it would be useful to be able to turn them off at will. I took this too far in my early teen years, forgetting what emotions were and how to feel them. But that was able to be mended and now I'm left with a great ability, one I'd describe as infallibly objective as opposed to being wrapped up in subjective tendencies and reacting through emotion. With the control over emotion and impulse, it's so much easier to observe patterns of behavior, emotion, and thought in order to make even more conclusions on the same topics.

I got inspired by Gradient's post so I hope I didn't sway the thread too far from the topic.

[Nature Boy]

Definitely a good idea for a thread.

I've seen this issue brought up a few times and overall, I do not see theism as a requirement in order for one to meditate. To say that an atheist cannot meditate is akin to saying an atheist cannot have a psychedelic experience. You don't need to believe in a beardy (white) guy in the sky in order to trip. I believe Sam Harris has written on this issue. Being an outspoken atheist, sometimes labelled as one of the 'Four Horsemen of Anti-theism' (along with Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens and Dan Dennett), Harris freely mentions that he practices meditation and many activities typically claimed as being religious or spiritual.

It seems as though those who back religion cannot differentiate between the exact practices of religion and those practices that can be undertaken in any mindset (e.g. "only religious people can be charitable"). I see it as a similar argument to this, rather audacious, claim that religious people live longer due to their unwavering optimism. As if religious belief creates a direct causation for one to live a longer life. Realistically this isn't true because there is no way of connecting optimism with belief in the supernatural directly as some supernatural beliefs are inherently negative e.g. 'original sin'. Optimism and positivity in general have many causes. I believe it's a gross misrepresentation for religious people to claim that their lives have been categorically enriched by maintaining religious belief. It's the equivalent of stating that people who live in warm countries are generally happier because they are exposed to more sunshine without any mention of environmental challenges such as drought, famine, skin cancer etc.

As with all of these theism vs. atheism issues, there are infinite shades of gray in-between. I don't think there is a religious act or practice that cannot be performed by an individual who claims to have no spiritual persuasion as such. Just because you wear a label (Christian, Jew, Muslim, neo-pagan etc.) doesn't mean you have super powers. The faculties of the mind are accessible to all humans. To think otherwise is preposterous when you scrutinize the matter.

[podge]

Swim has learned Transcendental Meditation and it has nothing to do with religon. Transcendental Meditation is about calming the mind in an effortless way, entering into meditation with the "intention" of having a mystical experience (or any other intention) is already contradictory to the purpose of meditation because having an intention/goal automatically requires effort. Entering meditation with no hopes or intentions , and just "being" in meditation is the way to go. In the same way a swimmer is meant to just go with a psychedelic experience and allow thoughts come and go and not fixate too much on any particular aspect.

So with that said, in some cases swim could see how it may actually be easier for atheists to meditate as they dont have spiritual concepts and idea's clouding and shaping their meditation into something it isnt.

Interesting thread.

[RaverHippie]

Originally Posted by podge

...entering into meditation with the "intention" of having a mystical experience (or any other intention) is already contradictory to the purpose of meditation because having an intention/goal automatically requires effort. Entering meditation with no hopes or intentions , and just "being" in meditation is the way to go.

I've always done things in this manner, perhaps it just needs to explored further.

Originally Posted by podge

So with that said, in some cases swim could see how it may actually be easier for atheists to meditate as they dont have spiritual concepts and idea's clouding and shaping their meditation into something it isnt.

Completely agree here.

[psyche]

Originally Posted by RaverHippie

I always found immense interest in the ability to overrule the impulsive and emotionally volatile portions of my brain. I grew up seeing the difficulties people had when they couldn't keep their emotions in check so I thought it would be useful to be able to turn them off at will. I took this too far in my early teen years, forgetting what emotions were and how to feel them. But that was able to be mended and now I'm left with a great ability, one I'd describe as infallibly objective as opposed to being wrapped up in subjective tendencies and reacting through emotion. With the control over emotion and impulse, it's so much easier to observe patterns of behavior, emotion, and thought in order to make even more conclusions on the same topics.

I got inspired by Gradient's post so I hope I didn't sway the thread too far from the topic.
????: Drugs Forum http://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=94632

Not at all. That actually rings bells. It's the same kind of circle I've gone around too. At some point emotions just didn't have any use and became irrelevant. The world is so interesting on it's own. Leaving feelings aside for a while provides with a very rich and unadultered view at the world! At some point it can get too much, and it's not easy to recognize that and get back to good old feelings.

Originally Posted by Nature Boy

I see it as a similar argument to this, rather audacious, claim that religious people live longer due to their unwavering optimism. As if religious belief creates a direct causation for one to live a longer life. Realistically this isn't true because there is no way of connecting optimism with belief in the supernatural directly as some supernatural beliefs are inherently negative e.g. 'original sin'. Optimism and positivity in general have many causes. I believe it's a gross misrepresentation for religious people to claim that their lives have been categorically enriched by maintaining religious belief. It's the equivalent of stating that people who live in warm countries are generally happier because they are exposed to more sunshine without any mention of environmental challenges such as drought, famine, skin cancer etc.

I beleive optimism really does play a huge role in longevity and health in general. It's propably one of the most important factors. I'm not sure of exact studies, but I beleive there are plenty. It ofcourse doesn't mean that any supernatural beliefs should be the reason for it.

To Gradient I've got not much to add without starting to write an essay, very comprehensive post. Especially interesting are the relations of the changes in the brain to the changes in the perception. Both in meditation and in normal everyday situations. Our evolution as a whole from the dawn of human experience is always a fascinating topic. It's interesting that meditation as a practise dates back reaaally far back in time, and it's closely related if not exactly the same as trance practise.

One little detail I would've put differently, to be nitpicky:

Originally Posted by Gradient

and cultivate the ability to dedicate thoughts as desired.

I would've said: "and develop the ability to cultivate thoughts as desired." I like the concept of cultivating thoughts Thoughts are like crossroads of qualia of mind from different points of time that void each other in collision to release a meaningful thought, in a way similar to how photon is released when two particles collide. If that makes any sense. I may be trying to say something too big to be said lol.

Originally Posted by podge

Swim has learned Transcendental Meditation and it has nothing to do with religon. Transcendental Meditation is about calming the mind in an effortless way, entering into meditation with the "intention" of having a mystical experience (or any other intention) is already contradictory to the purpose of meditation because having an intention/goal automatically requires effort. Entering meditation with no hopes or intentions , and just "being" in meditation is the way to go. In the same way a swimmer is meant to just go with a psychedelic experience and allow thoughts come and go and not fixate too much on any particular aspect.

So with that said, in some cases swim could see how it may actually be easier for atheists to meditate as they dont have spiritual concepts and idea's clouding and shaping their meditation into something it isnt.

My personal experience has been that atheistical approach made it initially hard to just let go because my mind would wonder easier to the knowledge and insights about universe than to the experience. I find it may have been easier to approach it with more sponateneous spiritual concepts, but I didn't get to know meditation through that sort of route so can't really say. It evolved from pondering and exploring ones mind analytically, but gained spiritual dimensions over time.

[Nature Boy]

Originally Posted by psyche

I beleive optimism really does play a huge role in longevity and health in general. It's propably one of the most important factors. I'm not sure of exact studies, but I beleive there are plenty. It ofcourse doesn't mean that any supernatural beliefs should be the reason for it.

Though I digress from the thread here, it is an interesting discussion. The problem with this assumption however, is how to quantify optimism. It's not as if a positive mindset alone can stave off aggressive terminal illnesses or keep your body in sound physical condition without lifting a finger. Obviously it helps when avoiding extreme situations such as depression-related suicide and may come in useful for older people coming to terms with their impending deaths but I fear that people have bought into this 'positivity industry' too much. This silly notion that you can live to be one hundred by just grinning and baring whatever life throws at you. If that results in neglecting basic health principles like excercising and eating well, it could end up being more harmful if anything. I don't think a person can truly be positive (or negative) without some kind of environmental benefit spurring them on. Individuals cannot be innately positive or negative.

We tend to classify people as optimists and pessimists too easily when in truth, no-one is either. Everyone is constantly going through a changeable range of emotions that dip up and down without any fixed pattern. Even people who have lived incredibly hard lives, and by all means one would expect them to be depressed, can still go on to live long lives. Perhaps there is a genetic trait that allows individuals to survive these encounters. Afterall, in our evolutionary history, the average early human had to deal with unimaginably hard challenges on a regular basis: death, famine, war, bloodshed, predators, natural disasters, illnesses, dying family members etc. But then again, modern society fucks with all of that hardwiring to the point where contemporary expectations can perhaps screw with the human mind more than we can imagine. Killed or be killed glad with what you have has transformed into eat, and sit and around and wonder what the point of it all is.

[psyche]

Originally Posted by Nature Boy

Though I digress from the thread here, it is an interesting discussion. The problem with this assumption however, is how to quantify optimism. It's not as if a positive mindset alone can stave off aggressive terminal illnesses or keep your body in sound physical condition without lifting a finger. Obviously it helps when avoiding extreme situations such as depression-related suicide and may come in useful for older people coming to terms with their impending deaths but I fear that people have bought into this 'positivity industry' too much. This silly notion that you can live to be one hundred by just grinning and baring whatever life throws at you. If that results in neglecting basic health principles like excercising and eating well, it could end up being more harmful if anything. I don't think a person can truly be positive (or negative) without some kind of environmental benefit spurring them on. Individuals cannot be innately positive or negative.

We tend to classify people as optimists and pessimists too easily when in truth, no-one is either. Everyone is constantly going through a changeable range of emotions that dip up and down without any fixed pattern. Even people who have lived incredibly hard lives, and by all means one would expect them to be depressed, can still go on to live long lives. Perhaps there is a genetic trait that allows individuals to survive these encounters. Afterall, in our evolutionary history, the average early human had to deal with unimaginably hard challenges on a regular basis: death, famine, war, bloodshed, predators, natural disasters, illnesses, dying family members etc. But then again, modern society fucks with all of that hardwiring to the point where contemporary expectations can perhaps screw with the human mind more than we can imagine. Killed or be killed glad with what you have has transformed into eat, and sit and around and wonder what the point of it all is.

While optimist and pessimist are very much over-used terms, my own experience is that there are people that are very fixated in seeing things the positive way, and there are also those who tend to see the negative(but they ofcourse insist on being only meticulous and objective). This is, ofcourse, talking about who the person really is, not just the superficial behaviour of the person affected by him still wondering about his role in the company. During the years I've come to realize just how incredibly wide array of different base-level feelings people can have, but what's more, how many people live in a grey area and change their mood according to always-changing environmental conditions. I'm just glad to bump into a real person once in a while, who is perfectly awake in the moment and is notably happy to just exist. No need to chit-chat or drive some agenda. Ofcourse there are also the optimists that need to be talking all the time or doing something in order to not become depressed.

About the longevity, as said, I don't have any studies, but those what I've heard of over the years tend to suggest that many actual illnesses are correlated on general life expectance. These people ofcourse propably do eat healthy etc. so it's difficult to screen for the actual effect, but I'm not intending to give up either so it really doesn't matter to me. It's the whole package. If good mood isn't a direct factor, then it can be a result of eating healthy.

This post is a bit offtopic.