No I haven't. I've been insisting that a worshipper thinks that there is something that in in some sense (classical, human-centric or not) could hear them. The worshipper does not think that the object of their worhip is not only indifferent, but incapable of being otherwise.

(And I'll note that I never said anthropomorphic, just conscious)

An interaction. The worshipper is sending and the worshippee is receiving.

And, you're wrong. You're clearly, definitively, wrong. This isn't debatable.
You're projecting something that isn't there 100% of the time, as you claim.

In my belief system, I adhere to the notion that I am an inextricable part of the Universe, part and parcel of the All. Thus, I can interact with it by a conscious act on my part, and it doesn't have to respond verbally. The change/action/whatever I am seeking is within myself, not outside. In a sense, I'm trying to rearrange my little part of the All, the part that is me, in some way. Prayer is a way of doing that, and therefore, in my mind, an interaction with the Universe.

When you think, or when you talk aloud to yourself, are you interacting? I think you are, because you are going through a process of some sort, intended to produce some sort of a result. Either you think up the solution to a problem, or you mull over the facts of a situation and arrive at some enlightenment or knowledge, or you change how you feel emotionally about something through the process.

Yeah, it sounds flakey. But then, that's me.

I haven't seen a counterexample yet.
I never said respond, let alone verbally.

Do you call what you do worship, and if so, what is it that you are worshipping?

I cannot imagine people worshipping without some purpose in mind. For the sake of argument, let's say there was a cult of Sphinx worshippers. Once a year, they make a pilgrimage to the Spinx, chant "Far Fucking Out, Man!" then return to their daily lives. They wouldn't want to emulate anything the Sphinx might mean to them, they wouldn't expect it to answer prayers, their lives would not be in anyway uplifted, nor would they have a special moment of Satori or something - none of that.

I would call that group a bunch of crazies - not worshippers.

I have tried all my life to be agnostic and failed repeatedly in the attempt. I have "resigned" myself to beleiving in an intelligence of the universe (for lack of some better word). I pray sometimes, but I don't expect a return answer in a letter written in beautiful gold calligraphy on fine vellum paper, with the return address on the cloudy blue envelope "God, Heaven."

Sometimes I am simply stunned by the beauty of nature on a clear desert night with a sky full of shooting stars. I've had moments that I can only describe as gifts of grace. I hope my own decidely odd spiritual path will help make me a better person, and also help me stop fighting life and begin living it instead.

The idea of "worship" with no expectation of anything of the heart or soul in return is the wrong use of the word. You might try "admiration", instead.

There is no counter-example to what you are saying because all you are saying is: someone who is doing what you call worship is doing what you say worship consists of, when you say worship meaning what you mean worship to mean. That's air-tight, certainly. Because it's a non-statement.

But "no purpose" is not the only alternative to "a specific purpose" . . .

If the benefit gained is recognized as having come from within yourself, then you would be aware that you only "communicated" with yourself.

You're playing word games.

The closest kind of thing that I can think when it comes to trying to understand where you're coming from is either that you're just being a brat or you're thinking of something like Zen Buddhism. The purpose of Zen is to become enlightened. However, as long as you have a DESIRE to become enlightened, it will never happen. Give up all desire for ANYTHING and you attain Nirvana. Desire enlightenment and next life time around you get to be a mule.

I understood everyone perfectly.

yes he's a brat and no Rk is seeking enlightenment and elspode is communing and happy monkey is explaining. You and I are just annoyed. :p

Now about worshiping.....

I want to say that worship happens between two lovers. Maybe he can intellectualize that one to death.:p ..or not

If you insist on using the word 'Jam' to describe something which is about to be spread on toast, it would be reasonable for me to form certain assumptions as to what you are about to eat.

*I* don't call it worship, because I have this inexorable sense of the word in association with kowtowing to something greater than myself, outside of myself, and that's not my belief system. What I do I call "ritual", and I've made many comments about what that means to me before on this board.

The notion of "prayer", however, has a fairly universal connotation to me. How one gets results from prayer, though, is vastly different in *my* purview than it is to most mainstream religions. As to "interaction" and "response" from the Universe, I guess it depends on how you look at it. Yes, the Universe responds, but it is *me* that changes. Because I am a fundamental component of the Universe, neither more or less important than any other component, when *I* change, the Universe changes. I'm not being argumentative, that's just how I see things. I *am* reaching outside of myself, because although I am a part of the Universe, I still wish to draw from, be in tune with, tap into...the All. I'm part of the Universe, but I'm a damn small part, and there's a lot more energy and inherent "mojo", if you will, to be accessed from the All.

I'm not. HP insists that "worship" is always communicative, and I disgree. What we're discussing is whether "worship" is communicative, not whether it has a purpose. I'm not playing word games. A non-communicative purpose is still a purpose.

You can form whatever assumption you want about a person's use of the word "worship" but you can't insist that your assumptions apply to that person's description of a non-concrete, internal activity taking place within their own mind. Jam can be observed directly, worship can not. It is defined within the individual.

Incidentally, the collective assumptions about what "worship" means, from a dictionary definition, do not specify a communicative act.

True. It can also, though, be defined by certain cultural understandings. Granted those cultural understandings vary enormously through time, space, cultural origin etc. But, that those cultural understandings vary does not mean that they go away and exert no influence on the hearer's comprehension. Language works partly through those shared understandings and references.