William James is not a floodlight kind of thing. Like he's citing a whole bunch of people. He's like somehow doing both at the same time, which is, I think, the very impressive thing. So shall we dive into what he actually says? The handiest of the marks by which I classify a state of mind as mystical is negative. It defies expression that no adequate report of its content can be given in words. In this peculiarity, mystical states are more like states of feeling than like states of intellect.
David and Tamler talk about William James’ chapter on mysticism from his book "Varieties of Religious Experience." What defines a mystical experience? Why do they defy expression and yet feel like a state of knowledge, a glimpse into the window of some undiscovered aspect of reality? Is Tamler right that David has a little mystic inside of him just waiting to burst forth from his breast?
Plus – another edition of VBW does conceptual analysis and we’re sticking with ‘c’ words – this time the definitive theory of ‘creepy.’
Sponsored By:
Support Very Bad Wizards
Links: