Comments on: Spiritual But Not Religious? Tell Me More.

By: Crafty Green poet

Crafty Green poet — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 07:56:27 +0000

In the UK full-time work is defined as generally being 35-37 hours, though 40 is not uncommon and of course there are people who work a lot more…… I have always worked part time, currently 21 hours a week and have found this fine financially. My partner works 35 hours a week. We try to live a low impact lifestyle and are not big consumers (escept for second hand books…….).

As for spiritual, not religious, some people say this and are very much in touch with a genuine spirituality that gives them a real meaning and inspires real activism, some people say it and mean that they like to have candles and incense in their living room. In general we go to church less in the UK than you do in the USA.

By: Alison

Alison — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 23:28:23 +0000

MM, I’ve read that folks in the European Union (variety of countries) work substantially fewer hours per week and year than we in the U.S. — and they maintain a very good standard of living.

By: MM

MM — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 22:02:14 +0000

Could Americans ever adopt a mindset where they work less than 50 hours per week? That would be awesome if the rat race could slow down a little.

Great ideas, well put again. Thanks.

By: Alison

Alison — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 23:53:57 +0000

Laura,
Interesting anecdote, one that I’d never heard before. I do believe there are some things that are universally true across time and across cultures, including in the realm of morality and ethics — and it sounds like the philosphers, religious people and scientists did arrive at universal values, albeit with different rationales. I like it. Thanks for sharing this; I like hearing from people with engineering backgrounds since I have a social sciences, literature and arts orientation, and I need your style of thinking to augment my own.

By: Laura

Laura — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 19:57:12 +0000

This reminds me of an anecdote from my engineering ethics textbook. It told the story of a committee that met in, I think the 50s, to hammer out a set of formal guidelines for scientific experimenting on humans. It consisted of people from several different religions, a few ethics philosophers, and some scientists. They argued unresolvably when they tried to come up with a list of first principles on which to base their guidelines. But when they stopped arguing and started looking at case studies instead, they all tended to agree on what was good or bad about the cases — even if their reasons differed.