Re: re'enai

[Jorge LLambias <jorge@PHYAST.PITT.EDU>]

la kolin cusku di'e

> This seems bizarre to me. Spirituality (which is what I thought re'e meant)
> has NOT THE SLIGHTEST THING to do with connotations or conventions. I demand
> a word that expresses that I am speaking about my spiritual or non-spiritual
> experience.

I agree. Religion and spirituality are not the same thing. Religion has a
lot of non-spiritual aspects, and there are a lot of spiritual things outside
of religion.

> I accept that there might be a case for making 'non-spiritual/materialistic'
> the mid-point (re'ecu'i), though I find it hard to think of what the negated
> pole might be (Jorge's suggestion of a mixture of prosaic, materialistic and
> philistine makes some sort of sense, but I see that as simply 'non-spiritual'
> on the spiritual axis combined with some other things).

Well, for me there is some difference between "materialistic" and
"non-spiritual". Maybe {re'ecu'i} is "non-spiritual/down-to-earth",
while {re'enai} is more like "materialistic/prosaic/philistine".
I agree that it's not a clearcut distinction.

Some other UI4s are also strange:

ro'o      UI4      physical
ro'onai   UI*4     denying physical
emotion category/modifier: physical - denying physical

What does "denying physical" mean? Is it something like "ethereal"?
Or a sixth sense type of thing? {ro'ocu'i} is non-physical, and
{ro'onai} has to be the opposite of physical, which is again not
too clear.

The same for "denying emotion". Is this "cold-blooded"?

And "sexual abstinence" is very funny. I don't know what the opposite
of sexual is, but to abstain from having sex doesn't seem to have
anything to do with this scale. Maybe {ro'unai} should be sublimation,
for the Freudians?

co'o mi'e xorxes