Connotation-proof
It’s somewhat related to Bruce Lee’s magic spell. In the sense that most words have connotations: some have many and others fewer.
In French, connotation refers to the secondary, implicit or cultural meaning that a word evokes in addition to its basic objective definition.
And that’s why I think it’s important to pay attention to the words we use when talking about this phenomenon and the people from the phenomenon mentioned in religions, among other things.
For example, to talk about the people from the phenomenon, I could use the word demon, but people would immediately imagine monsters with horns and wouldn’t take me very seriously.
I could talk about angels to describe them, but people wouldn’t take me very seriously either and would start imagining people with wings on their backs.
I could talk about spirits, but when reading that word, people would start picturing some kind of partly bluish, transparent ghost like in the movies.
I could talk about djinns, spirits that we represent a little differently, with an appearance similar to the genie in Aladdin.
I could talk about entities, but people would start imagining monsters, or those colorful entities with slightly LSD-like effects that people say they see when taking DMT.
I could also talk about deities or divine beings.
Anyway, that’s why I prefer to call them the people from the phenomenon mentioned in religions, among other things.
And likewise, I avoid using the word spiritual. I prefer to talk about what is beyond us, in the same way that a dog can’t understand the subtleties of a computer or a book: the people from the phenomenon are completely beyond our understanding of things.
To the point that when they interact with someone, it is automatically considered madness or delusion, and people move on without really trying to understand because it is possible, and that’s all.