Talk:Epiphany (feeling)

Moves
This all got a bit confusing: all the talk here was about Epiphany rather than Epiphany (feeling). I've moved the discussion that was here to Talk:Epiphany. Gareth Hughes 23:12, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I disagree with the status of this article as psych-. It is to some extent related to psychology, but at the same time to philosophy and literature, and I would be wary of forcing it into this category.

I always thought that the word Epiphany had the same meaning as euphoria, I realized that it did not when the article stated, "the moment of truth". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.178.35.176 (talk) 21:12, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

This article should probably provide links to other synonymous terms like gnosis, insight, enlightenment, self-realization or self-actualization, etc. 24.12.4.72 (talk) 20:45, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Appearance
"Epiphany" means "an appearance in this world of a being from another world." By "world," I mean something like "realm of being." "Epiphany" doesn't mean "euphoria," "insight," "enlightenment," etc. This is the same kind of problem that exists with the word "Nirvana," which means "extinction" but is often thought to mean "euphoria," "insight," or "enlightenment."Lestrade (talk) 18:30, 11 January 2010 (UTC)Lestrade


 * No it doesnt. The definition of the word is correct, it means "Manifestation or striking appearance"
 * Nirvana means "free from suffering"
 * Go look at this page Epiphany and you can see the different usages if you are worried that something is missing.
 * Chaosdruid (talk) 21:31, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * You can see these defs also


 * Merriam-Webster Dictionary
 * Function: noun


 * Inflected Form(s): plural epiph·a·nies


 * Etymology: Middle English epiphanie, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin epiphania, from Late Greek, plural, probably alteration of Greek epiphaneia appearance, manifestation, from epiphainein to manifest, from epi- + phainein to show ...


 * Date: 14th century


 * 1 capitalized : January 6 observed as a church festival in commemoration of the coming of the Magi as the first manifestation of Christ to the Gentiles or in the Eastern Church in commemoration of the baptism of Christ


 * 2 : an appearance or manifestation especially of a divine being


 * 3 a (1) : a usually sudden manifestation or perception of the essential nature or meaning of something (2) : an intuitive grasp of reality through something (as an event) usually simple and striking (3) : an illuminating discovery, realization, or disclosure b : a revealing scene or moment


 * MSN Encarta


 * noun


 * Definition:


 * 1. sudden realization: a sudden intuitive leap of understanding, especially through an ordinary but striking occurrence


 * It came to him in an epiphany what his life's work was to be.


 * 2. appearance of god: the supposed manifestation of a divine being


 * The definition "an appearance or manifestation especially of a divine being" is practically equivalent to my claim that it means "an appearance in this world of a being from another world." Current usage that means "enlightenment," "insight," or "euphoria," though, is incorrect. However, as Bartholomew Cubbins once said, "Bad language is universally triumphant, while good language lies face down in ashes."Lestrade (talk) 17:29, 12 January 2010 (UTC)Lestrade

I just noticed a similar confusion in the Avatar article.Lestrade (talk) 04:50, 13 January 2010 (UTC)Lestrade

It is not correct for someone to ignore the other meanings of a word though.

"Bad language is universally triumphant, while good language lies face down in the ashes." - well I am certainly not going to start to learn 16th century english and nor is the world going to revert to speaking Latin. This is not about language per se, this is about usage of a word and one of its meanings. This definition, Epiphany (feeling) such as "Eureka!" and "I suddenly realised why I was meant to do this job" certainly have nothing to do with a divine manifestation.

Unfortunately we are in a world which choose to use completely innocent words in ridiculous meanings, there is nothing we can do but try and convince others that they are wrong. After a while if the argument falls on deaf ears and the majority of people use the "incorrect" definition we can only accept it and move on.

I particularly liked the "Pants" definitions used colloquially a few years ago. At first it meant "rubbish", then after 4 or 5 years it meant "Great!" and now it is so pants it is rarely used if at all. Chaosdruid (talk) 08:42, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I had an epiphany and suddenly realized that you are correct. But why have any rules or laws at all? Anything goes.Lestrade (talk) 17:40, 13 January 2010 (UTC)Lestrade

Merger with Eureka effect
While there is an ongoing discussion on whether Eureka effect should be merged with the Aha! effect (at Talk:Aha!_effect), I also think we should consider whether those two articles should not be merged with this one. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; talk to me 04:36, 16 October 2011 (UTC)


 * What has epiphany got to do with feeling? Either the entry is about feeling or it is about epiphany. Why is feeling in brackets? Epiphany is a 'shining forth.' It is a 'breaking in' from another realm or dimension. P.S. Sutton — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philip s sutton (talk • contribs) 19:52, 3 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Don't epiphanies make you feel good? ;-)  I agree though: if there's anything worth saving in this article it could go under Joycean epiphany or Epiphany, figurative use of. I also think Epiphany ought to move to Epiphany (disambiguation) to make room for the main article, which is never a holiday where I live.Sparafucil (talk) 04:35, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Link Breaks
The above link breaks in cell my phone while chatting..... the ending bracket was not considered. This has happen with whatsapp chat. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epiphany_(feeling). I tried creating a redirect #REDIRECT to [] from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epiphany_(feeling but it seems to be restricted  Ganesh J. Acharya (talk) 06:39, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
 * There's nothing Wikipedia can do about your broken cell phone software. You need to contact technical support for the phone manufacturer (or for whatever third-party chat application you are using), or switch to a different phone or chat application which doesn't have this bug. —Psychonaut (talk) 09:54, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Etymology
Would someone further break down the word 'epiphany' into Greek 'epi' (top, above) and 'phaenein' (to show); similar to the etymology for 'apophania'? Thanks. 71.139.166.86 (talk) 19:21, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Before the meaning of the word was corrupted irreparably in the 20th century, it meant "the outward [epi] appearance [phanein], in this world, of a divine being from another world."Lestrade (talk) 23:54, 18 February 2014 (UTC)Lestrade

Irrelevant?
Is the word "irrelevant" the best choice to convey the meaning in the "Myth" section in the sentence quoted below:
 * "Epiphanies can be distinguished by a (usually spiritual) vision, as epiphanies are often triggered by irrelevant incidents or objects."
 * Perhaps "seemingly irrelevant" would be better, if it doesn't sound too awkward, as this is what seems to follow from the examples given above? The falling apple incident proved that the small object's motion was not completely "irrelevant" to Moon's motion, even though it seemed so to people before Newton, and the same can be told about Archimedes and his "Eureka!".
 * One might argue that the very choice of apple (or bath) in the original experiment was "irrelevant", but this leads to more questions. If it hadn't been that apple/bath, would it have been the same person who made the discovery? (See here for inspiration. C. Trifle (talk) 13:50, 2 December 2015 (UTC)


 * As follows from the reference (now number 8) mentioned in the above sentence, there is likely a misquotation in the sentence. In "Moments of Moments", page 43, line 20 (end of the paragraph), it is written about epiphany as "distinguished from" rather than "distinguished by" vision, which has a different meaning that contradicts the reference. Even if the sentence might be right, it sounds as OR. Therefore I think the best choice is to qoute the original sentence.C. Trifle (talk) 13:31, 11 December 2015 (UTC)