> Sam
>
> > some of us think that William James got it completely wrong......
>
> How so?
Hi Dave,
A while back I started down this road with John B, and promised him a more
substantial response in the fullness of time. Which - due to job change and
a move of house - I am only now getting down to; it will appear, hopefully,
in a week or two (I haven't forgotten John!). Put simply, William James
doesn't describe a form of mysticism recognisable to Christian theology,
rather, he describes what could be called Romantic mysticism, separate from
a religious tradition, which came about in reaction to the Enlightenment and
focusses on the experiences undergone by the individual in question (which
is NOT the emphasis of historical Christian mysticism - even if it is the
understanding purveyed in contemporary dictionaries). So James' definition
of religious experience needs to be taken with quite a large pinch of salt
IMHO.
Sam
(Reference to my earlier post:
http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/0203/0315.html and following
response from John)
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:29 BST