I upvoted you but I totally disagree - the idea that one can’t share their own “spiritual” experience without defining and agreeing (with others) on the definition doesn’t hold water for me.
Spirituality is inherently subjective - my wife feels it when she gives gratitude…my comment above is for sure more stupid but still valid
Do you mean “spiritual” as actually feeling a connection with the rest of all life, or understanding that each person is a tiny speck in an incomprehensibly vast universe, or imagining a connection with a personal deity, or imagining a connection with the dominant deity of the area, or feeling a peaceful satisfaction of connecting with yourself?
Religious people are likely to experience a different interpretation of the word spiritual than non-religious people. The use of the word spiritual at all will likely turn off a large part of the audience.
So I’m taking issue with the attempt to box in the word spiritual in one of your definitions.
If the post was asking about “happiness” instead of spirituality, nobody would be commenting “well hold on, before we begin discussion we’ll need to agree on what happiness means”
I’m not religious whatsoever btw.
To answer your question directly, I guess for me it’s the sense that something else is going on that is bigger than me. I’d personally also get this type of feeling by staring at the ocean.
I also agree, because we all pretty much understand what “happy” means.
No one seems to understand what “spiritual” means with any definition, and hence we shouldn’t just be using it like we do, in my opinion.
Apparently for you it means “gives you perspective into your own insignificance”, when I think for many people it, instead, means, “offers evidence for God or at least for the supernatural, in a non-spooky way”.
So… it’s a good way to get a group of people all talking about different things and feeling like they’re agreeing about things they don’t necessary agree by means of an equivocation fallacy.
The funny thing is, for all it’s descriptions in Yoga literature, if I tell you I had a partial kundalini awakening you still won’t know what I mean unless you experienced it yourself.
So no, a definition does not help to get a shared understanding.
… you are correct that if I’m unfamiliar with your terminology, I will not know what you mean.
You are incorrect that if I understand the definition of a “partial Kundalini awakening” I will not have a shared understanding. I can’t imagine why that would be true.
One cannot have a “spiritual” experience without having a shared definition of spiritual that isn’t just a deepity.
I would urge anyone who wants to share their “spiritual” experience to give a solid definition for the term first.
I upvoted you but I totally disagree - the idea that one can’t share their own “spiritual” experience without defining and agreeing (with others) on the definition doesn’t hold water for me.
Spirituality is inherently subjective - my wife feels it when she gives gratitude…my comment above is for sure more stupid but still valid
Do you mean “spiritual” as actually feeling a connection with the rest of all life, or understanding that each person is a tiny speck in an incomprehensibly vast universe, or imagining a connection with a personal deity, or imagining a connection with the dominant deity of the area, or feeling a peaceful satisfaction of connecting with yourself?
Religious people are likely to experience a different interpretation of the word spiritual than non-religious people. The use of the word spiritual at all will likely turn off a large part of the audience.
So I’m taking issue with the attempt to box in the word spiritual in one of your definitions.
If the post was asking about “happiness” instead of spirituality, nobody would be commenting “well hold on, before we begin discussion we’ll need to agree on what happiness means”
I’m not religious whatsoever btw.
To answer your question directly, I guess for me it’s the sense that something else is going on that is bigger than me. I’d personally also get this type of feeling by staring at the ocean.
I also agree, because we all pretty much understand what “happy” means.
No one seems to understand what “spiritual” means with any definition, and hence we shouldn’t just be using it like we do, in my opinion.
Apparently for you it means “gives you perspective into your own insignificance”, when I think for many people it, instead, means, “offers evidence for God or at least for the supernatural, in a non-spooky way”.
So… it’s a good way to get a group of people all talking about different things and feeling like they’re agreeing about things they don’t necessary agree by means of an equivocation fallacy.
I agree with your last statement!
Appreciate the discourse btw. Lemmy has been a positive place for it for me so far so thanks for continuing that.
Does it feel spiritual? Then it was.
The funny thing is, for all it’s descriptions in Yoga literature, if I tell you I had a partial kundalini awakening you still won’t know what I mean unless you experienced it yourself.
So no, a definition does not help to get a shared understanding.
… you are correct that if I’m unfamiliar with your terminology, I will not know what you mean.
You are incorrect that if I understand the definition of a “partial Kundalini awakening” I will not have a shared understanding. I can’t imagine why that would be true.
Just as an experiment, try to describe the taste of honey to someone who doesn’t know the sweetness, but be sure to demarcate against sugar.
And then imagine how much shared understanding there’d be.
You absolutely need experience at least in some limited ways to understand definitions or descriptions.