Where is the line drawn between philosophy and mysticism?They appear to have been closely intertwined in antiquity, but have since become discrete, and, perhaps, antithetical in the minds of post-enlightenment philosophers.
>>23539418Mysticism is a very vague term, but generally philosophy arose to help us communicate about experience, examine experience, and question our experiences, and this naturally includes mystical experiences.And mystical experiences are valuable in that they are essentially a mutation of normal experience which helps us evolve higher orders of thinking (although they may be destructive to the individual).
>>23539533The world exists in two places: temporal, spiritual. Philosophy can explain the physical, but falls short in explaining the other place. Mysticism doesn't.
>>23539418philosophy is a system that stands up to scrutiny through regularly applied principles, mysticism is in its name, mystical,, mystery etc. dependent on secreats, obscureities, feelings, and otherwise unsystematic approaches.>>23539665This is mysticism, since it assesses something without clear predicates.A philosophy would define what it means by siritual and physical and put it through some level of testing or consistancy making, while mysticism is less concerned with coherency necissarily.pnilosophy: love of wisdommysticism: secrete doctrine
>>23539418One could make arguments that there is a large distinction, and one could make arguments that they are different in name only. >philosophy is the study of the observable >mysticism is the study of the unobservable>philosophy itself is a non-physical concept that cannot be represented by material elements>mysticism is a way of helping to understand a chaotic world>philosophy can be used to help predict the more formulaic elements of life, such as a naked and hungry man will not be polite if you ask him the time>mysticism is merely man's response to fill in the gaps that philosophy missed. It really all depends on how you define these two terms. A philosopher I imagine as more of a cloistered book worm that looks at butterflies in glass jars. A mystic I imagine as sitting in a smoky room at the top of a tower trying to decipher God's meaning for creating butterflies. Both are thinking about butterflies.
>>23539727You have reduced philosophy to common sense, such as looking both ways before crossing the street, or not to fight wild animals. By suggesting that mysticism is secret knowledge, that would mean that humanity's ignorance is from a lack of mystical knowledge. If something is unknown, that makes it mystical, meaning electricity at one point was mysticism. I think your thought model needs some tinkering.
>>23539760These are the literal etymological meaning of the terms.Yes, the knowledge of electricity COULD be transmitted through mystical (secrete) means instead of frank emperical systemitized ones.they are methodologies. I have not reduced philosophy to any less then what it is, and nor did I reduce mysticism to less then it is.Someone is called a philosopher because they use upfront rational, someone is called a mistic because they do not.This is not saying mystic knowledge is impermissible, just that it is a different category.
>>23539418Philosophy is about thinking very hard and defining every little thing definable. Mysticism is closing your eyes and saying God told you something.
>>23539796I disagree that you consider mystics as people that do not use upfront rational thinking. Philosphy and mysticism both are non-physical and subjective concepts, and therefore they cannot be transmitted with a linguistic model based on talking about empirical physical data. Philosophy and mysticism cannot be measured and observed, they can only be talked about in uncertain terms that are different based on a variety of factors. If anything, they are dependent on each other. Your philosophy will dictate the interpretation of your mystic experiences, and your mystic experiences will dictate the interpretation of your philosophy. A good parallel question is what is the difference between knowledge and wisdom? What is the difference between reason and intuition? What is the difference between heads and tails?
>>23539965Pythagoras and Plato themselves were mystics. Rationalism and mysticism are entertwined.. which is the whole point of this thread.What they weren't were strong empiricists. That would be the Ionians. Who the post-Enlightenment somewhat revived from the dead.
>>23540069Neither Plato nor Pythagoras were mystics in the sense the anon you're replying to stated.
>>23539965>t. doesn't know technically they're both the same thing.
>>23539965You're wrong and really ignorant. And philosophers are fools anyway. They always think they're so profound and witty, but they're just massive fools. Just look at how stupid most philosophy discussions end up being. It's inherent. You could try to argue for some philosophers from another time, but they're really no different when push comes to shove.>>23541171They're really not the same thing.>technicallyYou must be a philosopher.
