To end this discussion of
Epistemology... let me simply say that for me, thinking and use of words are only useful if one is unaware of what lies behind a word, or a behavior? To conduct proper Psychotherapy one must deal with the I-MIND which is entirely Invisible to the brain. The point being, words are the lowest level of comprehension, and they also lack Truth [which is an absolute]. Therefore, I believe that one's faculty of Intuition, which is part of one's Soul, is a much more effective means of Knowing. Peace

"known by reason"? Let us separate Know with a capital "K", and know with a small case "k". To Know is to Know the Truth, which is quite rare. On the other hand, many people "think" they know the truth... but what they know is relative truth. And reason concluded by thinking is at best relative truth, since that is all the brain will ever Know. God is Neutral Spiritual Energy, which in the Bible is said to be a "void". Or an empty space, implying "nothing".
I agree that God is Invisible to the brain. But the MIND is also Invisible to the brain. Truth is also Invisible to the Brain. And an "object" can be destroyed, it is Energy that is not destroyed. Peace

example... the expression "I-MIND" refers to the fact that the MIND in Man is invisible to Man. However, all behavior is conditioned by the I-MIND, although the part the I-MIND plays is fully Invisible in the person engaging in the behavior. And a person will normally try to explain his or her behavior by rationalization, or by blaming his or her behavior on someone or some thing in his or her environment. I shorten all this by simply saying behavior is due t one's I-MIND. But saying this is misunderstood to imply that a person's behavior is an action of his or her brain, when the brain is nothing more than a conduit the I-MIND uses to effect a particular behavior. Peace

I'm sorry, my point was that your reaction is well-taken. But my expression has taken me over three decades to learn how to articulate multiple dimensions simultaneously operating"behind" some physical phenomenon that the brain "thinks" it understands...[which it never will], so my form of expression is what it is... which requires expansion and an acceptance of a number of "unknowns" on the reader's part. It is the best I can do at this juncture. Sorry. Peace

As for "fitting" in a "Psychiatric model," that would depend upon whose model one is referring to? My work was an extension of what Fritz Perls was introducing and never finished. I coined the term "Esochology" to suggest the [4] dimensions of Man which comprise the Whole Human Being, which is what I worked with. Peace

A person is fully justified in thinking about life, since it is one reason we have a brain. The problem is, thinking about the Reality of Life cannot provide the Reality of Life... since that Reality is Invisible to the brain. How do I Know this? It has been awakened from "Within" via my Intuition as a consequence of my daily meditation of about 2 hours per day for the last 50 years. There is much to be said for Meditation, by the way. Peace

I mean by Delusional Thinking, or D-Think, those words, thoughts and ideas that the I-MIND feeds to the Left-Hemisphere of the brain. And the brain, unable to perceive such D-Think as other than merely more "thinking," simply believes it is real and acts upon it. It is Delusional because it is not based on factual phenomena, but is used to keep a person focused on his or her Fate Karma. To speculate on the MIND by use of the brain is like speculating on the Reality of God. And Truth can only be experienced via one's faculty of Intuition, and is not available to the brain. Peace

And your point is well-taken. It has taken me 49+years to acquire what little comprehension I do have of my own processing. And my work with people regarding the operations of the Invisible MIND "Within" them over some 40 years as a Gestalt Psychotherapist also altered how I view the multiple dimensions of Man. Peace

Idiosyncratic would be one term to use, but would miss the essence of explaining my word usage and the difficulty of conveying phenomena that words cannot normally convey. That is, Spiritual Energy does exist. We refer to it as the Soul, or Spirit. But the terms Soul or Spirit cannot convey theEnergy these terms "stand for". To perceive this Energy, one must use one's faculty of Intuition, which is capable of operating in Invisible dimensions. Peace

Pure Spiritual Dimension is [in my own belief] what I refer to as "Neutral Spiritual Energy," or "NSgy" for short. I believe this is the Primordial Energy of Existence, thus what we refer to as God. Peace

More specifically to your question... all words are delusional in the sense that they are not Real in an absolute sense. What is Real? That which is permanent and unchanging. For example the Soul, God and Truth. Peace

I use the term "Delusional" to suggest that the thoughts or words being fed via one's I-MIND to the Left-Hemisphere of the brain are created, thus not Real in an absolute sense. Peace

Peace, as I use it... is not the opposite of war, it is the acquisition of Truth, which ONLY exists in the Pure Spiritual Dimension. Peace

For me Mysticism is an umbrella word for a range of spiritual ideas — Tom Storm

Pardon my interference, but the term "Mysticism "is quite specific in meaning. It refers to the ability to Intuit Spiritual Truth from "Within" ones own Conscious Awareness [or what philosophers refer to as the "Self"]. It also refers to a person's level of Consciousness that enables that person to access Spiritual Knowledge from "Within" him or herself via Intuition. Peace

I note that several posts use the term "knowledge"in the sense of information the brain can process. I personally differentiate information from Knowledge in that the brain processes information, but the brain cannot perceive Knowledge [which is found only in the Spiritual Dimension], and I am speaking about what the term Knowledge "stands for," which is only found "Within" the Spiritual Dimension. Possessing information about a term, such as the term "Soul," does not provide one the experiential Knowledge of one's Soul. So the term Soul does not provide one an experience of one's Soul. Peace

Discussion turns to argument the nearer discussion comes to a person's "unknown," which people tend to fear. That is, people tend to fear the words: "I don't know". And what people do not "know" are elements of existence they have yet to experience. Peace

There are several types of energy, not just physical energy. But your point, that Energy itself might be God... is correct, although this cannot be "proven" by intellectual or physical means. But it can be known by use of one's faculty of Intuition. Peace

The best way is to ask the older brother his "need" to hurt his younger brother? Do so lovingly, kindly, and with an honest desire to empathetically Know what is causing the older brother to need to hurt the younger brother. My guess? The older brother "feels" left out, or somewhat abandoned by the parents attention to and upon the younger brother. Peace

The question is between two words, not what the words stand for. How has philosophy contributed to science? It matters not what a person says, but whether or not what is being said is true or not? And since Truth cannot manifest on the physical plane of existence, what does that say about both science and philosophy, since both ignore and deny three-quarters of the Whole of Existence?

In the everyday life of the intellectual there are many terms the intellectual uses which are "abstract terms". And by "abstract" I mean letters arranged in such a manner to imply the label or identify of something because what is being identified by that label is INVISIBLE to the brain and one's physical senses. Does what is being pointed at by those terms: God, Soul, Truth, Reality, Consciousness, Spirituality, Astral body, and so forth... have an existence that is contained in, or explained by, the labels for those elements... or are these labels terms for phenomena that the intellectual has never actually experienced? If one has not actually experienced the existence of what some "abstract label" stands for... is it not dishonest to argue against the existence of what such an abstract term [stands for], when one has not actually experienced that of which an abstract term points to? The term for this kind of dishonesty is known as "Intellectualism".

Prior to referring to the "MIND," one might insure that one Knows that the two dimensions of the MIND [or I-MIND] are Invisible to the physical brain. That is, the Lower MIND represents the Astral Region of Creation, while the Higher MIND represents the Causal Region of Creation. Neither of these realms can be perceived by the physical brain [which is a unique muscle located in the skull]. Peace

To examine one's life begins with answering the question: Why is one alive? If one knows the reason one is alive, then what one must next examine is whether what one is calling "life" is Real, or an Illusion? And to even contemplate the question of an illusion, one must know the difference between an illusion, and Reality? The essential difference between Reality and illusion is whether one is permanent, or not? Everything in the illusion of life is subject to change. Peace

"Phobic-D" type personality? A person whose reasoning ability is compromised by one or more intense non-conscious fear(s) deeply repressed in his or her MIND [which is Invisible to the brain], and this phobia is taken-on in early childhood and involves a real or imagined traumatic event. And the self-protection against exposing this bit of trauma to conscious awareness takes precedence over, and automatically influences all of that person's thoughts, thinking and views of life.

Can anyone name one thing in the Creation that does not change? Is not the climate an element of the Creation? Therefore, how is it that a person [other than a "Phobic-D" type personality] would view climate change as unusual? Peace

In the East, it is said that many Souls wanted to visit the Creation that God had Created. And that many Souls wanted nothing to do with the Creation, and were quite content just living a Perfect Life with God. And what God did was send all Souls into the Creation, but that those who did not want to go, within them he placed the method of returning. So the Law of Karma was the way in which God enabled all Souls to explore and experience the Creation. As you sow, so shall you reap... is the basis of the Law of Karma. In wanting to visit the Creation, those Souls that wanted to explore it... created an action, and has continued to create more and more Karma. Those Souls that did not want to go, they are also burdened with a huge amount of Karma, but they have the means by which to reduce that load, and to begin to work their way back Home. Peace

It finds a parallel in the term "Truth". How long has philosophy sought to prove the existence of Truth, and yet has failed to do so? And how reluctant is the field to embrace the fact that the brain and thinking simply cannot "find" the Truth by thinking? Peace

Your last sentence pretty much says it all. We are most reluctant to accept how much of Reality the physical brain cannot perceive. Peace

It occurs to me that a clarifying label needs to be created for the field of Philosophy that sets aside as real, but rarely capable of Intuiting, certain concepts that presently the field attempts to embrace as simply unclear terminology, or an incomplete definition. Quite difficult for lovers of the brain and thinking [Intellectualism] to actually accept that the brain is entirely confined to the physical plane of existence. And there are three entire levels of existence beyond the physical dimension, and all four comprise the Whole Human Being. Peace

I believe that Taoism is another "Mysticism" type label. There is the term Taoism, and there is the practice which is Spiritual, or requires one to be in a level of Consciousness that is not physical, tangible, nor describable nor capable of being experienced via one's brain, thinking, or one's physical senses. Again, only that person who is capable of "experiencing" an altered state of being can "see" or awaken to an actual experience that the term Taoism attempts to describe by using intellectual terms that do not [cannot] actually convey the Mystical Experience... to a physical brain, body.

I like # 9, since what the label Mysticism refers to is the Spiritual Energy of the Soul, which I refer to as "NSgy," because of the term "Neutral". What does Man know that is Neutral? In the Bible, in Genesis, I, 1-2, it refers to existence as "without form," and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep..." But what if Existence prior to the Creation was quite Real, and fully operational, but also quite "Invisible" to the person writing the scripture? Creation was created, and thus, it exists "Within" the Primordial Existence... but it is also Invisible to Man. It is Man who intellectually needs for the Illusion of Creation to be real. Peace

To be as clear as I would like to be, it would perhaps be helpful if I explained my view of the Whole Human Being, or WHB? I view the Whole of Man as composed of four simultaneously existing and yet entirely separate vibrational dimensions, each with its own range of vibrations, which makes three of these Invisible to the physical dimension [which includes the brain].

Thanks, and "mental processing" can mean the brain or the MIND, but neither is capable of perceiving the Energy of Intuition... since Intuition is part of one's Soul, which I believe is "Neutral Spiritual Energy," or "NSgy" for short. Peace

The brain is physical. The MIND is not physical. The Soul is not physical. And Consciousness is the Energy of the Soul, and thus, also Invisible to the brain and one's physical senses.
I coined a term "ExperTuit" that refers to the experience of Invisible phenomena [by what philosophers call] the "Self". I refer to the Self as "Conscious Awareness," or 'C-Awar,' which is where one's Soul stores bits of Truth that one's Soul has acquired by Completing Karma. One's faculty of Intuition can access one's C-Awar, and can use these bits of Truth as a means of resisting a desire by one's MIND. We refer to this "operation" as "Intuition" or Enlightenment. Peace

Information is data the brain can perceive. It has nothing to do with Knowledge, nor is it useful in obtaining Knowledge. Peace