Timeline for What is the distinction between mysticism and metaphysics?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 19, 2018 at 16:25 | comment | added | user20253 | I would mildly disagree on the grounds that metaphysical truths can be explained by logic. What cannot be acquired in this way is understanding. I like your answer (upvoted) but feel it is misleading on a sensitive issue. Contra to Russell the mystics employ logic, reason and empiricism just as he does but unlike him they do not stop there and nor do they deny the results of logic and reason but claim that these results prove that Reality is just as they say it is. There are good logical demonstrations of what these 'intuitions' tell us about metaphysics and they require no special knowledge. | |
| Mar 8, 2016 at 6:43 | history | edited | Alexander S King | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 4 characters in body
|
| Dec 16, 2015 at 6:27 | comment | added | ian | that is no excuse! :) I jest, and I think my slight disagreement is less of a disagreement than a slight disclaimer. Regardless, that is a very interesting article, and I'll be reading the others in the series too, thank you for sharing. | |
| Dec 16, 2015 at 1:03 | comment | added | Alexander S King | @iain note that Wittgenstein was limited by the fact that he was using classical logic, Buddhist logic from what I understand is richer, and be understood in terms of developments in non-classical logic which have occurred after Wittgenstein's time. See this ref scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/09/08/… | |
| Dec 14, 2015 at 3:21 | comment | added | ian | I would (slightly) disagree with Wittgenstein on the "cannot", since, as a Buddhist I'm familiar with the goal being truths that seem to resist description and seem paradoxical or nonsensical if spoken of, but actually have a large body of formal and logical study behind them (that of Nagarjuna and Dignaga, for example). It's just that the point is to know these things like you know your own life, experentially, not just at an intellectual level. However good the map is it can never describe the terrain fully. Then again, it does decribe it. | |
| Dec 13, 2015 at 22:27 | vote | accept | Jordan S | ||
| Dec 13, 2015 at 22:24 | history | answered | Alexander S King | CC BY-SA 3.0 |