Nomenclature Confusion

From The SpiritWiki
Jump to: navigation, search


Nomenclature Confusion refers to the proliferation of terms used to describe Connection, [[[Connection Experience]], and Connection Outcomes. Nomenclature confusion is the result of theoretical and empirical confusion amongst scholars who study Connection Experience, and cultural, dogmatic, and individual differences between individuals who have Connection Experiences. Cultural, dogmatic, and individual differences lead to idiosyncratic explanations and expression, which adds to the nomenclature confusion.

Notes

Dossey refers to the problem, "One soon feels that attempts to define mind, soul, and consciousness, if not futile, are like the fable of the blind men describing an elephant: each description depends on the part of the anatomy the describer happens to be holding at the time," but also suggests that it is possible to sort things out, though wonders if this can be done within the frames of empirical science.Cite error: Closing </ref> missing for <ref> tag

"Earlier studies conducted both with college students and with a national sample administered by the Gallup Organization indicate that ecstatic experiences occur frequently, and may differ according to the social position of the respondent." [1]

"Persons of lower socio-economic status who are affiliated with the Southern Baptist church frequently report experiences which are triggered by religious phenomena and which are described as part of a religious context; persons of higher socio-economic status who do not have affiliations with a fundamentalistic church report experiences that are triggered by a wide variety of triggers and which are described and utilized in more diverse ways" [2]

Those with college education tend to report mystical experiencing using an aesthetic, neutral, secular language. Those with less education and a religious background use the language of their religion [3].

"In contrast, persons who are not familiar with this language or who wish to dissociate themselves from institutionalized religion find it more difficult to describe ecstatic feeling states, and in their struggle to verbalize the experience they utilize a much wider range of language symbols. [4]

"In the present study the transcendental experience, triggered by a range of events, is interpreted according to social position and the corresponding general frame of reference of the subjects."[5]

"In essence, we find a specific type of emotional experience which is variously interpreted as a religious or aesthetic experience depending on the general frame of mind which the subject brings to the experience."[6]


Footnotes

  1. Bourque, Linda Brookover, and Kurt W. Back. “Language, Society and Subjective Experience.” Sociometry 34, no. 1 (1971): 8.
  2. Bourque, Linda Brookover, and Kurt W. Back. “Language, Society and Subjective Experience.” Sociometry 34, no. 1 (1971): 8.
  3. Bourque, Linda Brookover, and Kurt W. Back. “Language, Society and Subjective Experience.” Sociometry 34, no. 1 (1971):
  4. Bourque, Linda Brookover, and Kurt W. Back. “Language, Society and Subjective Experience.” Sociometry 34, no. 1 (1971): 18.
  5. Bourque, Linda Brookover, and Kurt W. Back. “Language, Society and Subjective Experience.” Sociometry 34, no. 1 (1971): 18.
  6. Bourque, Linda Brookover, and Kurt W. Back. “Language, Society and Subjective Experience.” Sociometry 34, no. 1 (1971): 18.
Spiritwiki References