Comments on: I want to talk about spirit: but I don’t know if I can

By: Evan

Evan — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 07:10:34 +0000

Thanks John.

I hope you’re right. I can see I’m going to have follow up this post - not sure how yet though!

Ideas from others most welcome.

By: John

John — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 04:58:42 +0000

Ironically enough, bringing the topic to the table for discussion is the way to work past this problem. This won’t go away over night, but given time, the spotlight of discussion will chase away the shadows, and give shape to the vague definitions we use today. It’s long. It’s messy. But it also has a singular benefit: As long as discussion continues, it works

By: Evan

Evan — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 22:47:11 +0000

Well, I love having agreed definitions. It saves so much time and effort that is otherwise wasted I think.

For me the dimension of us that I call spirit is the one that responds to meaning and purpose. This has relevance to our other dimensions (my rough and ready list is: physical, emotional, mental and social).

Would love to have more discussion about this.

By: DrSteve

DrSteve — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 19:22:38 +0000

Now that you mention it, you’re absolutely right. I hear people using the term ’spritual’ all the time (I do myself) and it seems to be able to be bent into whatever shape the speaker needs. Somehow it sees wrong that such a ‘big’, important word has little shared meaning.

Is it something that could benefit from some rigourous thought, do you think? Then we’d at least be able to say, “Well, I know what Evan means by spiritual”. Or would that be against the spirit (!) of the matter?

(Thank you very much for the generous mention, by the way.)