Limited by the wiring and circuit breakers - typically 15amps.

With as resistive as skin is to electricity, 110 isn't usually enough to overcome it and push power through the heart.

Keyword: usually

The 15A limit in the circuit breaker is there to protect the wires, not you. 15A at 110V passing through your body will cause massive damage and literally cook you after stopping your heart if it's in the way.

Modern circuit breakers and outlets have GFCI/AFCI electronics that detect abnormal current leaks to ground and abnormal waveforms, and shut off the circuit. These actually stand a chance of saving you in a scenario like this.

If you have the live and neutral on the same finger you might be ok, the current wouldn't pass through your heart.

If you're earthed/grounded through your feet though, that's a problem, likewise if it's live on one hand and neutral on the other.

The wiring is meaningless. 1 amps is more than enough to kill you. Even if enough current flew to melt the cable you'd be dead well before the cable caught fire if it's flowing through you.

A breaker may provide some protection against electric shock (assuming it's an RCD or RCBO), but I wouldn't like to rely on it.

Portugal is 230V. Not sure what breaker the lighting would be on but in the UK it's not uncommon for a 6A lighting circuit to not be on an RCD at all.

I don't think the breaker is really relevant here. Unless you've been impaled by a spike, it's impossible to draw 15A of current through your body from a 120V or 240V circuit. At those voltages, there's really no difference (to you) between shocks from circuits with or without a 15A breaker.

I guess there is a asterisk here if you're also shorting something much more conductive than yourself, since the breaker might cut power before you'd naturally let go and break yourself from the circuit. But that seems like a pretty unlikely situation for most home shocks.

Yes but we can only speculate what happened.

My speculation: most of the power went through the light and only a part of it shocked the OP.

I'd agree, and not being connected to a good ground helped.

this is nonsense, and potentially deadly nonsense at that

I'm sorry what? You think it's nonsense that the lit lightbulb had more power going through it than the person touching the socket?

surely the light was dissipating more power, yes, but this was offered as a potential explanation for the fact that the person getting shocked only got a mild shock, a fact to which it has no causal connection whatsoever

It's not an explanation but it's directly connected to the explanation.

Calling the whole thing nonsense, without elaboration, is confusing at best.

no, it's utter nonsense from someone who is confusing power with current and has potentially fatal incorrect causal models about current