Philosophy Now Forum

Harbal wrote:

Jaded Sage wrote: A religious man doesn't have to speak about religious things.

True but what's the relevent conclusion we are supposed to draw from that.

That your conclusion is mistaken, that: "Going on your definition, it seems to me that if thoughts of God don't play a significant part in your life then the term "mystic" is an irrelevance."

Dubious wrote:...he who dives far beneath the surface membrane of logic; a mind traveler; that what cannot be spoken of not surrender to silence but recreated in the art of metaphor.

I've never heard of an illogical mystic, and I have no idea what a mind traveler is. They use metaphor sometime, and paradox.

Harbal wrote:

Dubious wrote:...he who dives far beneath the surface membrane of logic; a mind traveler; that what cannot be spoken of not surrender to silence but recreated in the art of metaphor.

So then, an illogical day dreamer who, although not very articulate with words, can sort of draw you a picture of what he means.

I've yet to see a mystic who is an illogical day dreamer. Often they can be very articulate. But yes, they can convey what they mean.

Dubious wrote:...he who dives far beneath the surface membrane of logic; a mind traveler; that what cannot be spoken of not surrender to silence but recreated in the art of metaphor.

I've never heard of an illogical mystic, and I have no idea what a mind traveler is. They use metaphor sometimes, and paradox.

Jaded Sage wrote: That your conclusion is mistaken, that: "Going on your definition, it seems to me that if thoughts of God don't play a significant part in your life then the term "mystic" is an irrelevance."

I don't see how the statement "A religious man doesn't have to speak about religious things." invalidates "Going on your definition, it seems to me that if thoughts of God don't play a significant part in your life then the term "mystic" is an irrelevance."

Jaded Sage wrote: I've yet to see a mystic who is an illogical day dreamer. Often they can be very articulate. But yes, they can convey what they mean.

I was only trying to interpret the other description.

Harbal wrote:

Jaded Sage wrote: That your conclusion is mistaken, that: "Going on your definition, it seems to me that if thoughts of God don't play a significant part in your life then the term "mystic" is an irrelevance."

I don't see how the statement "A religious man doesn't have to speak about religious things." invalidates "Going on your definition, it seems to me that if thoughts of God don't play a significant part in your life then the term "mystic" is an irrelevance."

Thoughts, words. Same thing.

Jaded Sage wrote: Thoughts, words. Same thing.

As nothing you have said so far makes any logical sense I assume you are trying to be mystical.

Harbal wrote:

Jaded Sage wrote: Thoughts, words. Same thing.

As nothing you have said so far makes any logical sense I assume you are trying to be mystical.

Then I suppose you'll have to explain what this means for me: "then the term "mystic" is an irrelevance."

What is this illogical kick you're on. Do you mean arational or post-rational. That's not the same thing.

Also, which definition. There are four.

Harbal wrote:

Dubious wrote:...he who dives far beneath the surface membrane of logic; a mind traveler; that what cannot be spoken of not surrender to silence but recreated in the art of metaphor.

So then, an illogical day dreamer who, although not very articulate with words, can sort of draw you a picture of what he means.

Why not just go to the default as understood by anyone as to what a mystic is usually considered to be, i.e., a complete quack whose mentality is dominated by some kind of brain virus.

Jaded Sage wrote:
Then I suppose you'll have to explain what this means for me: "then the term "mystic" is an irrelevance."

It means that it's hard to see how a person to whom "God" has no significance is going to find much significance in the term "mystic" . The basis for this opinion being your definition of mystic.

Do you mean arational or post-rational. That's not the same thing.

Whether it's the same thing or not is of no consequence to me. They are terms that you have decided to introduce so you can deal with them, I don't like the look of them and so would prefer to have nothing to do with them.

Harbal wrote:

Jaded Sage wrote:
Then I suppose you'll have to explain what this means for me: "then the term "mystic" is an irrelevance."

It means that it's hard to see how a person to whom "God" has no significance is going to find much significance in the term "mystic" . The basis for this opinion being your definition of mystic.

Do you mean arational or post-rational. That's not the same thing.

Whether it's the same thing or not is of no consequence to me. They are terms that you have decided to introduce so you can deal with them, I don't like the look of them and so would prefer to have nothing to do with them.

Whether they believe in or think about God has nothing to do with being as mystic, and neither does rejecting the title. Rejecting the title has nothing to do with anything.

What i mean is that illogical is not the same thing as a-rational or post-rational.

Also, again, which definition. There are four.

Jaded Sage wrote:
Whether they believe in or think about God has nothing to do with being as mystic,

One certainly wouldn't get that impression from your description of what a mystic is.

Rejecting the title has nothing to do with anything.

Did I reject a title? Could you jog my memory by telling me what title I rejected?

What i mean was the illogical is not the same thing as a-rational or post-rational.

Thank you for this information. I don't anticipate every having any use for it but it's nice to know it's there should I ever need it.

Harbal wrote:

Jaded Sage wrote:
Whether they believe in or think about God has nothing to do with being as mystic,

One certainly wouldn't get that impression from your description of what a mystic is.

Rejecting the title has nothing to do with anything.

Did I reject a title? Could you jog my memory by telling me what title I rejected?

What i mean was the illogical is not the same thing as a-rational or post-rational.

Thank you for this information. I don't anticipate every having any use for it but it's nice to know it's there should I ever need it.

What definition? There are four.

Not you rejecting the title. The guy who doesn't think about God.

Are you being deliberately difficult?

Jaded Sage wrote:
Are you being deliberately difficult?

No. I've been trying to make the point that you don't seem to have the slightest clue of what you are talking about. I didn't want to actually say it to you as bluntly as that so I was trying to find a way of bringing it to your attention more gradually. Anyway, the cat's out of the bag now so that's that.