Oh I’m not in the science room. I’m on my back lanai in a screen room with a fan on me typing on a forum on the Internet.
And yes, I go with that same definition of religious and faith as that.
The convoluted other meanings I hear tossed around don’t make much sense to me. But I’m big on metaphors, poetic language and such.
I even took an entire Thesaurus once and cross referenced all of the words to see what would happen. Ended up in five categories where each of the words in each of the categories have SOME connection to each other. Does it mean anything? I have no idea. So after a year of sitting on the results, I stuck the mess up there and left it.
I find deeper concepts more interesting than specific word choices and definitions.
I give priority to the etymological basis of words though, as they shine light on a deeper meaning that can sometimes be buried within the words and covered by centuries of baggage, so I’m often to be found in an online etymological dictionary. I find the movement of concepts across time and human subcultures fascinating, which sometimes gives me a weird perspective on things. smile emoticon
The meaning with the most meaning to me is the meaning that is the metaphor that can be actualized in reality. A good metaphor to describe a concept will free it, and a poor metaphor (and the poor metaphors are usually the ones that hang around for too long) will straightjacket the concept.
This is especially a big problem in the sciences.
The metaphor of wavepackets being billiard balls is embedded SO DEEPLY it affects not only other metaphors and analogies that we use to describe deeper processes, but it even straightjackets the choices of inquiry: If we’re conceiving wavepackets as billiard balls, that’s how we’re going to treat them, no mater how much mathematics we toss at it.
In our minds, they’re conceived as fancy billiard balls.
This is a problem.