Nomenclature Confusion - Revision history

Michael at 20:33, 28 September 2026

2026-09-28T20:33:31Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:33, 28 September 2026
Line 51:		Line 51:

	* '''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.<ref>Dossey. Recovering the Soul: A Scientific and Spiritual Search. Toronto: Bantam Books, 1989. p. 2-3.</ref> Ultimately, Dossey concludes that some imprecision is required in order for "language" to be effective (p. 4).		* '''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.<ref>Dossey. Recovering the Soul: A Scientific and Spiritual Search. Toronto: Bantam Books, 1989. p. 2-3.</ref> Ultimately, Dossey concludes that some imprecision is required in order for "language" to be effective (p. 4).
	* '''Bourque, Brookover, and Back''' refer to the problem. "On the other hand, the genuine inquirer will find before long a number of self-appointed apostles who are eager to answer his question in many strange and inconsistent ways, calculated to increase rather than resolve the obscurity of his mind. He will learn that mysticism is a philosophy, an illusion, a kind of religion, a disease; that it means having visions, performing conjuring tricks, leading an idle, dreamy, and selfish life, neglecting one's business, wallowing in vague spiritual emotions, and being "in tune with the infinite." He will discover that it emancipates him from all dogmas--sometimes from all morality--and at the same time that it is very superstitious. One expert tells him that it is simply "Catholic piety," another that Walt Whitman was a typical mystic; a third assures him that all mysticism comes from the East, and supports his statement by an appeal to the mango trick. At the end of a prolonged course of lectures, sermons, tea-parties, and talks with earnest persons, the inquirer is still heard saying--too often in tones of exasperation--"What is mysticism?" <ref>Underhill, Evelyn. Mysticism: A Study in the Nature and Development of Spiritual Consciousness. New York: Dover Publications, 2002. https://amzn.to/2C91xNY.</ref>		* '''Bourque, Brookover, and Back''' refer to the problem.

	=== Commentary ===		=== Commentary ===

Michael at 20:28, 28 September 2026

2026-09-28T20:28:15Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:28, 28 September 2026
Line 54:		Line 54:

	=== Commentary ===		=== Commentary ===

	The suggestion that imprecision is unavoidable or even necessary is unsatisfactory. Nonsense, in my view. If we are to move the area forward, we need to establish precision of meaning		The suggestion that imprecision is unavoidable or even necessary is unsatisfactory. Nonsense, in my view. If we are to move the area forward, we need to establish precision of meaning

Line 65:		Line 66:
	==Quotes==		==Quotes==

	''Aldous Huxley'''<blockquote>"Our problem is to adapt a language which is not now suitable to describing the continuum of mind and body, a universe of complete continuity. Somehow or other we have to invent the means of talking about these problems in an artistically varied way which shall make them accessible to the general public. Ideally, for example, we ought to be able to talk about a mystical experience simultaneously in terms of theology, of psychology and of biochemistry. This is a pretty tall order, but unless we can do something of the kind, it will remain extraordinarily difficult for people to think about this continuous web of life, to think about it as a continuum, and not in terms of the old Platonic and Cartesian dualism which so extraordinarily falsifies our picture of the world. How we are going to do this, how the literary men are going to achieve this miracle of language, I don’t know, but I think it has to be achieved. And maybe we shall. Maybe some future Shakespeare will arise with an immense command of language, able to take our existing English, and somehow, by some miracle of poetry or miracle of poetic prose, render this picture of a continuum. This is something I myself have thought about a great deal, and frankly I do not have enough talent for the task."<ref>Aldous Huxley, “Chapter Twenty-Six: 1959 Letters,” in Moksha (Rochester, Vermont: Park Street Press, 1999).</ref></blockquote>[[Evelyn Underhill]]<blockquote>...the genuine inquirer will find before long a number of self-appointed apostles who are eager to answer his question in many strange and inconsistent ways, calculated to increase rather than resolve the obscurity of his mind. He will learn that mysticism is a philosophy, an illusion, a kind of religion, a disease; that it means having visions, performing conjuring tricks, leading an idle, dreamy, and selfish life, neglecting one's business, wallowing in vague spiritual emotions, and being "in tune with the infinite." He will discover that it emancipates him from all dogmas--sometimes from all morality--and at the same time that it is very superstitious. One expert tells him that it is simply "Catholic piety," another that Walt Whitman was a typical mystic; a third assures him that all mysticism comes from the East, and supports his statement by an appeal to the mango trick. At the end of a prolonged course of lectures, sermons, tea-parties, and talks with earnest persons, the inquirer is still heard saying--too often in tones of exasperation--"What is mysticism?"<ref>Evelyn Underhill, ''Mysticism: A Study in the Nature and Development of Spiritual Consciousness'', Kindle (Dover Publications, 2002).</ref></blockquote>{{template:endstuff}}		''Aldous Huxley'''<blockquote>"Our problem is to adapt a language which is not now suitable to describing the continuum of mind and body, a universe of complete continuity. Somehow or other we have to invent the means of talking about these problems in an artistically varied way which shall make them accessible to the general public. Ideally, for example, we ought to be able to talk about a mystical experience simultaneously in terms of theology, of psychology and of biochemistry. This is a pretty tall order, but unless we can do something of the kind, it will remain extraordinarily difficult for people to think about this continuous web of life, to think about it as a continuum, and not in terms of the old Platonic and Cartesian dualism which so extraordinarily falsifies our picture of the world. How we are going to do this, how the literary men are going to achieve this miracle of language, I don’t know, but I think it has to be achieved. And maybe we shall. Maybe some future Shakespeare will arise with an immense command of language, able to take our existing English, and somehow, by some miracle of poetry or miracle of poetic prose, render this picture of a continuum. This is something I myself have thought about a great deal, and frankly I do not have enough talent for the task."<ref>Aldous Huxley, “Chapter Twenty-Six: 1959 Letters,” in Moksha (Rochester, Vermont: Park Street Press, 1999).</ref></blockquote>[[Evelyn Underhill]]<blockquote>...the genuine inquirer will find before long a number of self-appointed apostles who are eager to answer his question in many strange and inconsistent ways, calculated to increase rather than resolve the obscurity of his mind. He will learn that mysticism is a philosophy, an illusion, a kind of religion, a disease; that it means having visions, performing conjuring tricks, leading an idle, dreamy, and selfish life, neglecting one's business, wallowing in vague spiritual emotions, and being "in tune with the infinite." He will discover that it emancipates him from all dogmas--sometimes from all morality--and at the same time that it is very superstitious. One expert tells him that it is simply "Catholic piety," another that Walt Whitman was a typical mystic; a third assures him that all mysticism comes from the East, and supports his statement by an appeal to the mango trick. At the end of a prolonged course of lectures, sermons, tea-parties, and talks with earnest persons, the inquirer is still heard saying--too often in tones of exasperation--"What is mysticism?"<ref>Evelyn Underhill, ''Mysticism: A Study in the Nature and Development of Spiritual Consciousness'', Kindle (Dover Publications, 2002).</ref></blockquote>

			{{template:endstuff}}

	[[category:terms]]		[[category:terms]]
	[[category:lightningpath]]		[[category:lightningpath]]
	[[Is a key term::Knowledge System\| ]]		[[Is a key term::Knowledge System\| ]]

Michael at 20:27, 28 September 2026

2026-09-28T20:27:48Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:27, 28 September 2026
Line 65:		Line 65:
	==Quotes==		==Quotes==

	''Aldous Huxley'''		''Aldous Huxley'''<blockquote>"Our problem is to adapt a language which is not now suitable to describing the continuum of mind and body, a universe of complete continuity. Somehow or other we have to invent the means of talking about these problems in an artistically varied way which shall make them accessible to the general public. Ideally, for example, we ought to be able to talk about a mystical experience simultaneously in terms of theology, of psychology and of biochemistry. This is a pretty tall order, but unless we can do something of the kind, it will remain extraordinarily difficult for people to think about this continuous web of life, to think about it as a continuum, and not in terms of the old Platonic and Cartesian dualism which so extraordinarily falsifies our picture of the world. How we are going to do this, how the literary men are going to achieve this miracle of language, I don’t know, but I think it has to be achieved. And maybe we shall. Maybe some future Shakespeare will arise with an immense command of language, able to take our existing English, and somehow, by some miracle of poetry or miracle of poetic prose, render this picture of a continuum. This is something I myself have thought about a great deal, and frankly I do not have enough talent for the task."<ref>Aldous Huxley, “Chapter Twenty-Six: 1959 Letters,” in Moksha (Rochester, Vermont: Park Street Press, 1999).</ref></blockquote>[[Evelyn Underhill]]<blockquote>...the genuine inquirer will find before long a number of self-appointed apostles who are eager to answer his question in many strange and inconsistent ways, calculated to increase rather than resolve the obscurity of his mind. He will learn that mysticism is a philosophy, an illusion, a kind of religion, a disease; that it means having visions, performing conjuring tricks, leading an idle, dreamy, and selfish life, neglecting one's business, wallowing in vague spiritual emotions, and being "in tune with the infinite." He will discover that it emancipates him from all dogmas--sometimes from all morality--and at the same time that it is very superstitious. One expert tells him that it is simply "Catholic piety," another that Walt Whitman was a typical mystic; a third assures him that all mysticism comes from the East, and supports his statement by an appeal to the mango trick. At the end of a prolonged course of lectures, sermons, tea-parties, and talks with earnest persons, the inquirer is still heard saying--too often in tones of exasperation--"What is mysticism?"<ref>Evelyn Underhill, ''Mysticism: A Study in the Nature and Development of Spiritual Consciousness'', Kindle (Dover Publications, 2002).</ref></blockquote>{{template:endstuff}}

	"Our problem is to adapt a language which is not now suitable to describing the continuum of mind and body, a universe of complete continuity. Somehow or other we have to invent the means of talking about these problems in an artistically varied way which shall make them accessible to the general public. Ideally, for example, we ought to be able to talk about a mystical experience simultaneously in terms of theology, of psychology and of biochemistry. This is a pretty tall order, but unless we can do something of the kind, it will remain extraordinarily difficult for people to think about this continuous web of life, to think about it as a continuum, and not in terms of the old Platonic and Cartesian dualism which so extraordinarily falsifies our picture of the world. How we are going to do this, how the literary men are going to achieve this miracle of language, I don’t know, but I think it has to be achieved. And maybe we shall. Maybe some future Shakespeare will arise with an immense command of language, able to take our existing English, and somehow, by some miracle of poetry or miracle of poetic prose, render this picture of a continuum. This is something I myself have thought about a great deal, and frankly I do not have enough talent for the task."<ref>Aldous Huxley, “Chapter Twenty-Six: 1959 Letters,” in Moksha (Rochester, Vermont: Park Street Press, 1999).</ref>

	{{template:endstuff}}

	[[category:terms]]		[[category:terms]]
	[[category:lightningpath]]		[[category:lightningpath]]
	[[Is a key term::Knowledge System\| ]]		[[Is a key term::Knowledge System\| ]]

Michael at 20:06, 28 September 2026

2026-09-28T20:06:23Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:06, 28 September 2026
Line 13:		Line 13:
	[[Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Knowledge System]]\|format=ul}}		[[Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Knowledge System]]\|format=ul}}

	[[Nomenclature Confusion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Nomenclature Confusion]]}}		[[Nomenclature Confusion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Nomenclature Confusion]]\|format=ul}}

	===Syncretic Terms===		===Syncretic Terms===

	[[Nomenclature Confusion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Nomenclature Confusion]]}}		[[Nomenclature Confusion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a syncretic term::Nomenclature Confusion]]\|format=ul}}

	===Related LP Terms===		===Related LP Terms===

	[[Nomenclature Confusion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Nomenclature Confusion]]}}		[[Nomenclature Confusion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related LP term::Nomenclature Confusion]]\|format=ul}}

	===Non-LP Related Terms===		===Non-LP Related Terms===

	[[Nomenclature Confusion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Nomenclature Confusion]]}}		[[Nomenclature Confusion]] > {{#ask:[[Is a related term::Nomenclature Confusion]]\|format=ul}}

	==Notes==		==Notes==

Michael at 03:50, 28 September 2026

2026-09-28T03:50:42Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:50, 28 September 2026
Line 61:		Line 61:
	# Providing its own neutral, non-denominational, unbiased, and modern terminology		# Providing its own neutral, non-denominational, unbiased, and modern terminology
	# Explicitly mapping [[Syncretic Terms]]—different terms from different traditions that refer to the same underlying concept		# Explicitly mapping [[Syncretic Terms]]—different terms from different traditions that refer to the same underlying concept
	# Pursuing [[Semantic Integration]]—the systematic interlinking of concepts into logically consistent, ontologically grounded, and navigable knowledge networks Other proposed solutions include Johansson's "umbrella concept"<ref ~~name="johansson"~~ /> and the use of [[Boundary Object\|Boundary Objects]] to enable communication across communities of practice.		# Pursuing [[Semantic Integration]]—the systematic interlinking of concepts into logically consistent, ontologically grounded, and navigable knowledge networks Other proposed solutions include Johansson's "umbrella concept"<ref>Johansson, Katarina. “Lived Religion and Mystical Experiences: Finding an Inclusive Umbrella Concept for Varieties of Experiences Deemed Religious.” ''Approaching Religion'' 12, no. 1 (January 2022): 132–48.</ref> and the use of [[Boundary Object\|Boundary Objects]] to enable communication across communities of practice.

	==Quotes==		==Quotes==

Michael at 03:47, 28 September 2026

2026-09-28T03:47:23Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:47, 28 September 2026
Line 2:		Line 2:
	<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>		<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
	<blockquote class="definition">		<blockquote class="definition">
	'''Nomenclature Confusion''' refers to the proliferation of terms used to describe ~~a field. For example~~, the ~~concept~~ of ~~the soul~~, ~~the notion~~ that ~~there is a part of you that exists independently of your physical body~~, ~~has been~~, ~~over~~ the ~~centuries, referred to in dozens~~ and ~~dozens~~ of ~~ways (see Syncretic Terms under~~ [[~~Spiritual Ego~~]] ~~for a complete list)~~.		'''Nomenclature Confusion''' refers to the proliferation of competing, inconsistent, and overlapping terms used to describe the same underlying phenomenon—most notably, [[Connection Experience]] and the common elements of human spirituality. Nomenclature confusion arises because every culture, epoch, and often every individual coins their own terminology for experiences that are difficult to capture in words, Nomenclature Confusion impedes clear communication, cross-tradition comparison, scientific investigation, and the development of grounded theories of [[Human Development]] and the [[Full Realization]] of [[Human Potential]].
	</blockquote>		</blockquote>

Line 29:		Line 29:
	==Notes==		==Notes==

	Nomenclature confusion is a problem of biblical proportions.		=== Etiology ===
			Nomenclature confusion is a problem of biblical proportions. It arises because every culture, every epoch, sometimes every person, has their own word to describe the common elements of human [[Connection Experience]] (a.k.a spiritual experience), and because the common elements can sometimes be difficult to describe, being often larger than simple words can express. How can one express the truths of the Soul with a single word? So, scholars and individual mystics often coin their own terms in attempts to accurately represent their understanding, thereby exacerbating the problem.

	Nomenclature ~~confusion strikes often~~.		For obvious reasons, Nomenclature Confusion is an obstacle to theorization, empirical investigation, broader understanding of [[Human Development]] the [[Full Realization]] of [[Human Potential]], and the creation of a [[Harmonic Social Structure]] (i.e., [[Eupsychia]] in [[Abraham Maslow]]'s terms), at both an individual and collective level.

	~~Nomenclature confusion arises because every culture~~, ~~every epoch~~, ~~sometimes every person~~, ~~has their own word to describe~~ the ~~common elements~~ of ~~human [[Connection Experience]]~~ (~~a.k.a spiritual experience)~~, ~~and because the common elements can sometimes be difficult to describe~~, ~~being often larger than simple words can express~~. ~~How can one express~~ the ~~the truths of the Soul with a single word? So, scholars~~ and ~~individual mystics often coin their own terms in attempts to accurately represent their understanding, thereby exacerbating the problem.~~		=== Social Position and Language ===
			Interestingly, '''Bourque, Brookover, and Back''' provide a sociological analysis of the causes of nomenclature confusion, concluding that one's social position (social class, culture, etc.) influences both the experience and its interpretation:

	~~For obvious reasons~~, ~~Nomenclature Confusion~~ is ~~an obstacle~~ to ~~theorization~~, ~~empirical investigation~~, ~~broader understanding~~ of ~~[[Human Development]]~~ the ~~[[Full Realization]]~~ of ~~[[Human Potential]]~~, and the ~~creation~~ of ~~a [[Harmonic Social Structure]] (i~~.e., ~~[[Eupsychia]] in [[Abraham Maslow]]'s terms~~), ~~at both an individual~~ and ~~collective level~~.		* "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."<ref name="bbback18">Bourque, Linda Brookover, and Kurt W. Back. "Language, Society and Subjective Experience." Sociometry 34, no. 1 (1971): 18.</ref>
			* "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._"<ref name="bbback8">Bourque, Linda Brookover, and Kurt W. Back. "Language, Society and Subjective Experience." Sociometry 34, no. 1 (1971): 8.</ref>
			* "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"<ref name="bbback8" />
			* 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.<ref name="bbbackpagen">Bourque, Linda Brookover, and Kurt W. Back. "Language, Society and Subjective Experience." Sociometry 34, no. 1 (1971): <!-- PAGE NUMBER NEEDED --></ref>
			* "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.<ref name="bbback18" />
			* "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."<ref name="bbback18" />

	'''Nomenclature Confusion is a recognized problem in the literature'''.		'''Nomenclature Confusion is a recognized problem in the literature'''.
Line 43:		Line 50:
	*'''Parsons''' points to a "rich diversity of definitional strategies, theoretical agendas, and methodological concerns." <ref>Parsons, William B. ''The Enigma of the Oceanic Feeling: Revisioning the Psychoanalytic Theory of Mysticism.'' Cambridge, MA: Oxford University Press, 1999. p. 4. <nowiki>https://amzn.to/2Tq1qsl</nowiki>.</ref>		*'''Parsons''' points to a "rich diversity of definitional strategies, theoretical agendas, and methodological concerns." <ref>Parsons, William B. ''The Enigma of the Oceanic Feeling: Revisioning the Psychoanalytic Theory of Mysticism.'' Cambridge, MA: Oxford University Press, 1999. p. 4. <nowiki>https://amzn.to/2Tq1qsl</nowiki>.</ref>

	* '''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.<ref>Dossey. Recovering the Soul: A Scientific and Spiritual Search. Toronto: Bantam Books, 1989. p. 2-3.</ref> Ultimately, Dossey concludes that some imprecision is required in order for "language" to be effective (p. 4)~~. Nonsense, in my view. If we are to move the area forward, we need to establish precision of meaning~~.		* '''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.<ref>Dossey. Recovering the Soul: A Scientific and Spiritual Search. Toronto: Bantam Books, 1989. p. 2-3.</ref> Ultimately, Dossey concludes that some imprecision is required in order for "language" to be effective (p. 4).
	* '''Bourque, Brookover, and Back''' refer to the problem. "On the other hand, the genuine inquirer will find before long a number of self-appointed apostles who are eager to answer his question in many strange and inconsistent ways, calculated to increase rather than resolve the obscurity of his mind. He will learn that mysticism is a philosophy, an illusion, a kind of religion, a disease; that it means having visions, performing conjuring tricks, leading an idle, dreamy, and selfish life, neglecting one's business, wallowing in vague spiritual emotions, and being "in tune with the infinite." He will discover that it emancipates him from all dogmas--sometimes from all morality--and at the same time that it is very superstitious. One expert tells him that it is simply "Catholic piety," another that Walt Whitman was a typical mystic; a third assures him that all mysticism comes from the East, and supports his statement by an appeal to the mango trick. At the end of a prolonged course of lectures, sermons, tea-parties, and talks with earnest persons, the inquirer is still heard saying--too often in tones of exasperation--"What is mysticism?" <ref>Underhill, Evelyn. Mysticism: A Study in the Nature and Development of Spiritual Consciousness. New York: Dover Publications, 2002. https://amzn.to/2C91xNY.</ref>		* '''Bourque, Brookover, and Back''' refer to the problem. "On the other hand, the genuine inquirer will find before long a number of self-appointed apostles who are eager to answer his question in many strange and inconsistent ways, calculated to increase rather than resolve the obscurity of his mind. He will learn that mysticism is a philosophy, an illusion, a kind of religion, a disease; that it means having visions, performing conjuring tricks, leading an idle, dreamy, and selfish life, neglecting one's business, wallowing in vague spiritual emotions, and being "in tune with the infinite." He will discover that it emancipates him from all dogmas--sometimes from all morality--and at the same time that it is very superstitious. One expert tells him that it is simply "Catholic piety," another that Walt Whitman was a typical mystic; a third assures him that all mysticism comes from the East, and supports his statement by an appeal to the mango trick. At the end of a prolonged course of lectures, sermons, tea-parties, and talks with earnest persons, the inquirer is still heard saying--too often in tones of exasperation--"What is mysticism?" <ref>Underhill, Evelyn. Mysticism: A Study in the Nature and Development of Spiritual Consciousness. New York: Dover Publications, 2002. https://amzn.to/2C91xNY.</ref>
	Interestingly, '''Bourque, Brookover, and Back''' provide a sociological analysis of the causes of nomenclature confusion concluding that one's social position (social class, culture, etc) influence experience and understanding.

	* "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~~.~~"<ref>Bourque~~, ~~Linda Brookover, and Kurt W~~. ~~Back. “Language, Society and Subjective Experience.” Sociometry 34, no. 1 (1971): 18.</ref>~~		=== Commentary ===
	* "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.''" <ref>Bourque, Linda Brookover, and Kurt W. Back. “Language, Society and Subjective Experience.” Sociometry 34, no. 1 (1971): 8.</ref>"~~		The suggestion that imprecision is unavoidable or even necessary is unsatisfactory. Nonsense, in my view. If we are to move the area forward, we need to establish precision of meaning
	* 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" <ref>Bourque, Linda Brookover, and Kurt W. Back. “Language, Society and Subjective Experience.” Sociometry 34, no. 1 (1971): 8.</ref>

	* 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 <ref>Bourque~~, ~~Linda Brookover, and Kurt W. Back. “Language~~, ~~Society~~ and ~~Subjective Experience.” Sociometry 34, no. 1 (1971):</ref>.~~		== Solutions ==
	* "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. <ref>Bourque~~, ~~Linda Brookover~~, and ~~Kurt W. Back. “Language, Society and Subjective Experience.” Sociometry 34, no. 1 (1971): 18.~~</~~ref~~>		The Lightning Path addresses Nomenclature Confusion by:
	* "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~~.~~"<ref>Bourque, Linda Brookover, and Kurt W. Back. “Language, Society and Subjective Experience.” Sociometry 34, no. 1 (1971): 18.</ref>~~
			# Providing its own neutral, non-denominational, unbiased, and modern terminology
			# Explicitly mapping [[Syncretic Terms]]—different terms from different traditions that refer to the same underlying concept
			# Pursuing [[Semantic Integration]]—the systematic interlinking of concepts into logically consistent, ontologically grounded, and navigable knowledge networks Other proposed solutions include Johansson's "umbrella concept"<ref name="johansson" /> and the use of [[Boundary Object\|Boundary Objects]] to enable communication across communities of practice.

	==Quotes==		==Quotes==

Michael at 12:51, 10 April 2026

2026-04-10T12:51:28Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:51, 10 April 2026
Line 33:		Line 33:
	Nomenclature confusion strikes often.		Nomenclature confusion strikes often.

	For obvious reasons, Nomenclature Confusion is an obstacle to theorization, empirical investigation, broader understanding of [[Human Development]] the [[Full Realization]] of [[Human Potential]], and the creation of a [[Harmonic Social ~~Order~~]] (i.e., [[Eupsychia]] in [[Abraham Maslow]]'s terms), at both an individual and collective level.		Nomenclature confusion arises because every culture, every epoch, sometimes every person, has their own word to describe the common elements of human [[Connection Experience]] (a.k.a spiritual experience), and because the common elements can sometimes be difficult to describe, being often larger than simple words can express. How can one express the the truths of the Soul with a single word? So, scholars and individual mystics often coin their own terms in attempts to accurately represent their understanding, thereby exacerbating the problem.

			For obvious reasons, Nomenclature Confusion is an obstacle to theorization, empirical investigation, broader understanding of [[Human Development]] the [[Full Realization]] of [[Human Potential]], and the creation of a [[Harmonic Social Structure]] (i.e., [[Eupsychia]] in [[Abraham Maslow]]'s terms), at both an individual and collective level.

	'''Nomenclature Confusion is a recognized problem in the literature'''.		'''Nomenclature Confusion is a recognized problem in the literature'''.

Michael at 15:52, 25 February 2026

2026-02-25T15:52:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:52, 25 February 2026
Line 9:		Line 9:
	===Key Concepts===		===Key Concepts===

	[[~~SpiritWiki~~]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::~~SpiritWiki~~]]\|format=ul\|sort~~=Has sort SW~~}}		[[Epistemic Infrastructure]] {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Epistemic Infrastructure]]\|format=ul\|has sort EI}}

	[[Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Knowledge System]]\|format=ul}}		[[Knowledge System]] > {{#ask:[[Is a key term::Knowledge System]]\|format=ul}}

Michael at 20:28, 10 January 2026

2026-01-10T20:28:06Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:28, 10 January 2026
Line 2:		Line 2:
	<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>		<h1 class="customtitle">{{FULLPAGENAME}}</h1>
	<blockquote class="definition">		<blockquote class="definition">
	'''Nomenclature Confusion''' refers to the proliferation of terms used to describe a field. For example, the concept of the soul, the notion that there is a part of you that exists independently of your physical body, has been, over the centuries, referred to in dozens and dozens of ways (see Syncretic Terms under [[Spiritual Ego]] for a complete list).		'''Nomenclature Confusion''' refers to the proliferation of terms used to describe a field. For example, the concept of the soul, the notion that there is a part of you that exists independently of your physical body, has been, over the centuries, referred to in dozens and dozens of ways (see Syncretic Terms under [[Spiritual Ego]] for a complete list).
	</blockquote>		</blockquote>

Line 33:		Line 33:
	Nomenclature confusion strikes often.		Nomenclature confusion strikes often.

	For obvious reasons, Nomenclature Confusion is an obstacle to theorization, empirical investigation, broader understanding of [[Human Development]] ~~and~~ the [[Full Realization]] of [[Human Potential]], and the ~~final realization~~ of [[Eupsychia]].		For obvious reasons, Nomenclature Confusion is an obstacle to theorization, empirical investigation, broader understanding of [[Human Development]] the [[Full Realization]] of [[Human Potential]], and the creation of a [[Harmonic Social Order]] (i.e., [[Eupsychia]] in [[Abraham Maslow]]'s terms), at both an individual and collective level.

	'''Nomenclature Confusion is a recognized problem in the literature'''.		'''Nomenclature Confusion is a recognized problem in the literature'''.

Michael at 20:20, 10 January 2026

2026-01-10T20:20:26Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:20, 10 January 2026
Line 64:		Line 64:
	[[category:lightningpath]]		[[category:lightningpath]]
	[[Is a key term::Knowledge System\| ]]		[[Is a key term::Knowledge System\| ]]
	~~[[Is a related LP term::Avatar.GLOBAL Knowledge System\| ]]~~