Whatever floats your boat, I would say. — Punshhh
Say praxis obtained some insight into himself (obtained knowledge about himself) using mysticism as a means (whatever that really means we'll ignore for the moment). Could you, Tzeentch, or I use the same means to obtain the same insight into praxis? What method would we use to gain the same insight into praxis? It seems to me that, logically, we'd have to use the same method to obtain the same knowledge, but will we? Why, or why not? — Harry Hindu
my experience with mysticism, which doesn't amount to much — TheMadFool
mysticism doesn't offer anything new — TheMadFool
I just finished two books by Habermas on communicative action which provide an extremely robust account of the evolution and reification of reason as a social construct. — Pantagruel
the only tangible results have been soft-spoken, half-asleep, long-bearded individuals with a cult following. — TheMadFool
This is what's known as a stereotype. Best avoided if you'd like to have an accurate picture of the world. — ZzzoneiroCosm
I see a contradiction in the above. Do you?
Not much experience, yet happy to rest on a bold conclusion. — ZzzoneiroCosm
That's an odd use for "credible" you've got there. — Metaphysician Undercover
Assuming these individuals and their 'cults' are genuinely happy, why does this bother you? — Tzeentch
For a chap who is not bothered about all those Mystics, you are banging your drum quite hard there.
Stick around and listen to what some of them say and you might find there is a bit more to it than people staring at their navels. — Punshhh
Say praxis obtained some insight into himself (obtained knowledge about himself) using mysticism as a means (whatever that really means we'll ignore for the moment). Could you, Tzeentch, or I use the same means to obtain the same insight into praxis? What method would we use to gain the same insight into praxis? It seems to me that, logically, we'd have to use the same method to obtain the same knowledge, but will we? Why, or why not? — Harry Hindu
— PunshhhThis is not to deny anything about religion, or God, but rather they are not of importance within the practice. Others may disagree.
As I understand it most recorded mystical experiences are given within a religious or cultural framework. Absent any framework there is nothing to say about an experience except via poetry or allusive language. But then poetry has its inevitable cultural moorings, even in the absence of an explicit frame.
This correlates to my experience. There was what seemed like an extremely bright( but not bright in the sense that it lit up the room), but when you looked into it it was to bright to make anything out. Also there was the sense that it was spatially concentrated, like the tardis in Dr Who. There could have been whole worlds of beings in there. There was the feeling of peace and omniscience and I could sense someone talking inside it, that I was aware of. They were discussing whether I was ready to be taken, or it wasn't my time. After giving it their careful consideration they concluded it wasn't my time and it moved and faded away. But the feeling of awe and wonderment, the deep feeling that everything was going to be alright (in the sense of after death), the deep sense of peace and benevolence and omniscience remained with me for quite while and the whole experience is still vivid to me now 30 years later.I also did not see my own body (like derealization describes), but I lost awareness of it. I always saw some blue visual, which I can only describe as 'cosmic', like a star. The visuals only played a minor role, though. The sensations of inner peace and omniscience were much more profound and made a bigger impression on me.
So it seems to me that you would already have some assumptions that you are basing your interpretation of the experience on. If you already believe in spirituality, mysticism, supernatural, etc. (name your favorite anthropomorophic buzz-word that makes humans special), then you are likely to interpret some ineffable experience as such. — Harry Hindu
I wonder if you would mind mentioning the names of these two books. — ZzzoneiroCosm
What else has mysticism achieved? — TheMadFool
Not to be offensive but you too are making some very bold assertions. — TheMadFool
You could start solving it by backing off the statement that all we ever talk about is our own opinions — Harry Hindu
I make bold assertions because I have twenty years' experience with mystical illumination. — ZzzoneiroCosm
Then I must defer to your better judgement.
Just curious. What have your discoveries been so far? — TheMadFool
Given the above, mysticism is, to my reckoning, just the emotional aspect of realization which is, unfortunately, not accompanied by any real understanding of anything at all. Mysticism, my interpretation of it, is like masturbation - you experience the ecstacy of ejaculation but you actually didn't have sex :chin: — TheMadFool
So your argument is, we can only talk about our opinions and our opinions are about whatever it is we are talking about? Whoah, that one made me dizzy. :vomit:I didn't say that. I said our own opinion about whatever it is we are talking about. You have missed the nuance of the statement. — Pantagruel
So when you explain your experience as a deactivation of your neural default mode network, is that the insight/knowledge about you that you are talking about obtaining?I believe that mystical experiences correlate to a deactivation of the neural default mode network. A couple of the basic characteristics of that brain state are a loss of a sense of self and a depatterning effect on the mind. I don’t think it’s hard to imagine the sort of insight that could be gained from this kind of experience. In any case, one benefit is existential anxiety relief.
Any method to deactivate the network could work, like meditation, psychedelics, electrical fields, whatever. — praxis
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.