Hello everyone. I'm Stephen West.
This is Philosophize This.
Thank you to everyone who supports the podcast on Patreon, patreon .com slash Philosophize This.
So please listen to at least the last episode before this one, but a couple episodes ago, I brought up Heidiger in relation to Nietzsche, and I said that a classic Heidiger -style question that really shows the differences between him and Nietzsche is that he asks, Is it possible to think without the will?
Meaning, is it a part of our thinking, to not only be able to have freedom of the will, to be able to will yourself on to situations when you choose to, but beyond freedom of the will, is there also a freedom from the will that's an important part of our thinking as well?
Now what this question refers to is Heidiger's later work, after being in time, after dauzein, after showing the limitations of only framing things in terms of subjects and objects, willing ourselves onto reality.
After that, he moves on to a very interesting stage of his philosophy, where the main thing that he wants to explore in his later work is what he calls releasement or letting be.
Let's talk more about what that might look like.
See, if the world around us to Heidiger is made up of a bunch of people that have a technological and framing to everything, where everything and everyone is just an object that we need to will ourselves onto.
Let's structure things.
Let's manipulate them, optimize them.
And if by doing that, it leads to a world where we're constantly seeing everything in terms of how to manipulate people to produce the most efficient outcome, then what would happen if someone decided there was more to life than doing that all the time?
What if somebody didn't buy the whole sales pitch that you're a bad person if you aren't constantly trying to educate yourself about the problems of seven and a half billion people?
What if there's more to what we are than constantly trying to save the world all the time through rational utilitarianism?
What if somebody instead decided to focus on trying to understand the nature of their own being better by putting in the work to maybe try to uncover a far more meaningful, richer, fuller experience of what it is to even exist?
Well, first of all, real question, should this person have to apologize for spending their time in this way?
In other words, is this just a poorly disguised move of a selfish person who's ignoring all the really important work we have to do of projecting ourselves onto the world and fixing it?
Or could this more meaningful connection with the world be something that we're sadly missing in the modern world?
Something that people have not only forgotten about is they spiritually drown every day in their political video game.
But could it be something that explains why Heidegger's Dasan, we talked about last podcast, could ever be such a foreign concept for most people to wrap their heads around?
Is a pre -theoretical, more immediate connection with our existence, just a bunch of religious nonsense?
Or are there things specifically about the type of modern world that we're living in that prevent people from accessing this kind of experience more often?
Releasement, or letting be to Heidegger, is going to involve us going from the standard subject -object framing of things, freedom of the will, in the Nietzschean sense, to freedom from the will, more along the lines of the work of people like Simone Weil.
But still, if I'm going to get on board with this whole idea, Heidegger, you're still going to have to convince me that all of this is possible.
I mean, what evidence do we really have of the fact that anyone is ever operating outside the framing of subject -object?
What, a bunch of people reporting their own experience of it?
What, are we talking about religious mystics that take drugs and go horseback riding with Jesus in a vision?
As a modern, scientifically -minded person that doesn't do drugs, how am I supposed to take any of this stuff seriously?
Well, since you brought it up, hypothetical person, let's talk about mysticism today.
It wasn't the plan or anything.
Look, if you wanted to find a gateway into this more immediate connection to being that people are claiming to have had throughout history, well, there's many different gateways you could say.
One of the pieces of low hanging fruit here is going to be the long tradition of what's come to be known as mysticism.
Now, there's actually quite a lot to what mysticism is.
It's been decades reading about it and have really only touched a piece of the kinds of profound experiences that people have reported they've gotten to.
And to be clear, today's episode is not supposed to be an overview of mysticism in full, as though that's even possible.
What it is, though, is an attempt to clear up some common misconceptions about mysticism, how it's been framed as irrational, delusional, the antonym to philosophy.
And the hope is to open someone's mind up to the importance of mysticism as one of these potential gateways out of these narrow thinking traps we sometimes fall into specifically in the modern world.
We're going to go into all of this in detail.
And the vehicle for doing this, to give this podcast some structure, are going to be some of the arguments making a case for mysticism from the philosopher Simon Critchley's new book on this whole subject matter.
Now, no, I've been talking about the guy a lot lately, Simon Critchley.
The episode we did on Greek tragedy and the tragic perspective, mentioned his work last time talking about Heidegger.
I've just been reading his work a ton this last month, preparing for this particular arc of the show.
The guy is a scholar of Heidegger's work.
I mean, he thinks being in time is one of the most important books that's been released in the last hundred years, and we'll see more of why he thinks that today.
But much like his book on tragedy, where he's trying to make this different way of viewing the world more accessible, you know, something a little less limited to the idealism that people typically frame things in terms of, this book on mysticism is another installment in that same kind of effort.
In a world where we don't have an idealistic way of framing reality anymore, does that just sentence us to lives where there's no meaning or purpose connected to anything?
Well, if you wanted to think in a different way that didn't seem so alienated, how would you do that if you wanted to be kind of secular about it?
Well, Greek tragedy, Heidegger, mysticism, these are three approaches that Simon Critchley's dedicated a significant portion of his time here on this planet, trying to open people's minds more up to.
Now, how about this question from the hypothetical skeptic from before, as a modern person, how are we supposed to take anything someone says seriously, who calls themselves a mystic?
I mean, isn't that the last thing you'd ever want to put on a job application?
I'm a mystic. Well, the first step in digging into this area is going to be to say that most of these people throughout history that we would call mystics today, didn't in fact, think of themselves as mystics.
Simon Critchley says in the book, mystic is a word that was actually created fairly recently around the 1700s.
It is created in a very specific cultural climate that was hostile towards the more religious approach that many of these mystics were immersed in.
This is around the time of Immanuel Kant.
Critchley says Kant, and people like him around this time thought that philosophers were kind of like the policemen of thinking, that it's a philosopher's job to protect us from all the dogma and the fanaticism out there.
So anybody claiming to be walking around having religious experiences that can't even really be described using ordinary language.
Well, we're skeptical of that kind of stuff in this time.
These people are gonna be a problem.
Critchley thinks this misunderstanding that was taken up by many thinkers from around this time has led to the term mystic being used, at least in philosophy circles, almost as an insult.
Mystics are irrational.
They can't even explain what it is they're experiencing.
Mysticism is just where you go.
If you're a charlatan, you have nothing actually useful to say.
You just go hide behind a bunch of flowery sounding words and hock your latest video course on YouTube.
But again, it should be said, the reality when it comes to mysticism is that almost all these people that we would call mystics today didn't call themselves that.
And they also weren't people that thought of themselves as opposed to reason in any way.
None of these people were irrational, but they weren't born, you know, looked around them, there's way too much rationality in this world around me.
I think I'll be more of a mystical kind of person where a wizard's hat around as I go everywhere.
No, most of these people were achieving what we would now call mystical experiences by devoting themselves to a highly rational engagement with the texts and practices of their time.
For example, medieval Christian mystics like St.
Teresa of Avila or St.
John of the cross. These are people that devoted multiple hours every day of their life to contemplative prayer and rational meditation in the Jewish tradition.
Kabbalists would spend years of their life decoding and contemplating the meanings hidden in Hebrew scripture, deep rational engagement with these texts every day.
Sufi mystics like Rumi would repeat divine names over and over again in specific, highly structured ways, just to try to cultivate more clarity and stillness.
Point is, this is not the picture of someone that's hostile towards rationality.
This is the picture of someone highly committed to a devotional practice that they gave everything they had to.
And these are just a few examples of many.
So if mysticism isn't about rejecting rationality, like philosophers of the past might have us believe, then what is it really about if we're going to clear the air here?
One of the things Critchley says is important to consider is just how difficult it is to define something like mysticism.
Because we're talking about people from such different points in history with different cultures, religions, languages, on one hand, it's difficult to put them all into one basket and say they're the exact same thing.
On the other hand, when you listen to what they were describing in their testimonies, there's enough of an overlap between what they say that we can definitely say there's something these people were witnessing that's along the same lines.
And if we had to give an example of a type of common mystical experience just for the sake of this episode, Simon Critchley might like as a starting point the description given by the theologian Bernard McGinn, who says that mystical experiences typically fall into two different categories.
One is where someone transcends the self and experiences a feeling of unity or communion with the divine or something greater than themselves.
The other is in the opposite direction where the self dissolves or is pushed aside.
Similarly, making room for an experience where the normal lines are blurred between ourselves and something greater that we're all a part of.
Now after getting to here, mystics will often report all sorts of emotions that then flood over them from a deep feeling of peace to ecstasy to love to awe and connection to even fear as they're hit with something that feels on one hand so alien to their normal everyday experience, but deeply real.
Most of them say it feels more real than reality and significant in a way that feels impossible to fully put into words.
Now real quick, something that needs to be said before we proceed with this definition.
There are many different types of mysticism that approach these experiences from different premises than this one.
Some types of mysticism will even steer into the self as a starting point.
What we're laying out here, what I'm trying to do, focusing on the boundaries of the self, is just again a very common type of mystical experience that people all across history have described and it's arguably the best place to start if we want to have a frame of reference for the rest of this conversation,
opening people up to this being more than just religion.
I'm just saying, don't limit yourself to only this definition if you keep reading about this stuff, but this is the one we're going to be working with here today.
Now that said, no matter how scientific of a person you are, when you hear about so many people from history, across cultures, having a common experience like this one we just described, you have to ask, is your theory that this is just a bunch of delusional monkey brains collectively tripping on a religion?
Or are these people really having an experience with something that they're describing as the divine?
As something beyond rational comprehension or words?
And the question Simon Critchley wants to ask us is, you know, just using secular language here to start out, if this was a type of aesthetic experience that was available to you as a person, in theory, would you be interested in experiencing it if you could?
Would you want to feel an utterly transformative connection to the divine if that was something that was possible?
And I got to imagine a lot of skeptics out there might say back to this, uh, yeah, I guess, but what are we even talking about here?
The problem's not that I don't want to feel this way.
The problem is there's nothing out there that's what you're calling the divine.
I mean, if somebody says to me, my, my self has dissolved away and I'm feeling a connection with God, show me the man in the sky with a staff that they're talking to, or else I'm tempted to file this one under the delusional monkey category myself.
In other words, show me the material causal explanation for this divine thing that they're experiencing or else what?
What are we just abandoning the notion that our experiences have to correspond to some reality?
And while this is an understandable response from the subject object framing of things to Simon Critchley, this misses the point of what's even being talked about in this more phenomenological framing of things where the subjective experience itself is what we're studying, not how mental events correspond
to some material cause.
Put another way, when I am highly committed to a devotional practice for months or years of my life, when I'm doing deep readings of liturgical texts every day, when I'm doing hundreds of hours of meditating, praying, visualizing, fasting, being in solitude, sitting in nature with the intention of surrendering
the boundaries of myself over to allow space for something greater to reveal itself in a moment.
And when I feel a sense of overwhelming connection to everything and everyone around me, when time dilates and feels almost like it ceases to exist, when something expands out of me that feels not like I'm tripping, but like I'm actually seeing things for the first time without the filters on, and it feels
very difficult for me to explain what it is I'm experiencing in rational terms.
Is that experience I'm having not real?
Is it less real than the objects that are in the world?
Real question. I mean, subjectively, this is a real experience I am having, and it's one that many other people throughout history have had as well.
And from a phenomenological perspective, subjective experience is something that's worthy of being studied simply in its own right.
But still, you could ask, what's the thing?
What's the object in the world that's causing that experience you're having?
And if you're going to call it God, well, then where is that God in the world?
Well, the bottom line is this.
The validity of this type of experience comes down not to whether it connects to some cause in the material world.
The reality of this goes on at the level of subjective transformation.
So the more relevant question becomes, if you're studying it, not what is the material cause of it, but is there a devotional practice that is possible that can reliably lead human beings to this type of subjective experience?
Can we give people this subjective experience?
Is a state of consciousness like this something we can cultivate?
But see, Critchley would want to stop you right there using words like consciousness.
And as we know from last episode, Heidegger also wouldn't want to bring this kind of word in to describe what it is we're talking about.
Again, it just reduces what this is.
And it's something that brings in far too many dualistic assumptions about the mind being separate from the body.
But maybe there's a way here to use the idea of consciousness to open someone up that's skeptical of this whole line of conversation to things that aren't very easily described by rationality alone.
And I think it'll help us see what can be problematic specifically about the tendencies in our modern world.
So everybody that's listened to the consciousness episodes of this podcast knows that consciousness is one of the most mysterious and exciting things that we have to study in the sciences today.
Tons of different theories about it.
Nobody solved the hard problem of consciousness yet.
And you can hear things like the multiple drafts model that talk about how consciousness is maybe dozens of parallel processes that are all intersecting at a particular point, where it's very difficult to estimate how these things are in communication with each other, how much of consciousness is a subconscious
process, how much of consciousness is really just an illusion.
You can start to consider how mysterious the concept of consciousness even is.
And then you can go a step further, you can realize that consciousness is really just a word.
It's just a label we've come up with that tries to rationally constrict something that's possibly too complicated to ever tie down with rational language.
It's possible we're using one word here to describe a hundred things that intersect and could be studied more accurately at an individual level.
It's possible there are things that were lumping in under the banner of consciousness that are just not things that can even be studied at the subject object level.
Things like the type of existential structures of Dasein that we talked about last episode.
Now you can say back to this, well, so what?
This is what we do in the sciences.
We need a words that we can start having these sorts of conversations.
And then over time, with a better understanding, our words will improve.
The way we talk about it will become more sophisticated.
This is how the history of science works.
But look, none of this is to put science down and what it's trying to do.
This is simply to illustrate that the universe out there, regardless of whether our words are sufficient to be able to describe it or not, the universe is just going on all the time, always moving in all of its unbridled enormous complexity.
And just because we have a word that we use to try to describe a set of phenomena, doesn't mean that it's encapsulating all of it.
In fact, rationality, just in general, is a constricting type of process.
We're always trying to use rationality to craft a concept that is manageable for human minds to comprehend and work with as we go throughout our lives.
And here's the larger point.
The type of rational terms we have to experience the world with play a part in determining the phenomenological experiences that are possible for us to have.
And just so we don't have to interrupt the show at any point beyond this, I want to thank everybody that goes to the sponsors of the show today and the sponsors of the show sub at any level at patreon .com slash philosophize this first up.
Today is Lumen. What is Lumen?
Lumen is the world's first handheld metabolic coach.
It's a device that measures your metabolism through your breath.
Then on the app, it lets you know what percentage you're burning fat or carbs.
And then if you need it, it can give you tailored guidance to improve your nutrition, workouts, sleep, even stress management.
If you can't afford a personal coach all the time, like who can, but you want to understand your metabolism and food timings better.
Lumen really does have a lot of valuable information that can help keep you organized.
It also, in my experience, gamifies working out a little bit because it gives you that visual, colorful thing that I don't know, helps long -term goals feel a little bit more real in the short term.
Anyway, I'm supposed to say you breathe into your Lumen first thing in the morning.
It gives you a personalized nutrition plan for that day based on your measurements.
And look, it's not a magic cure, all right.
You're still going to need to work hard.
It's not a replacement for a doctor, but your metabolism is important and having metrics to be able to understand it better can be an important tool in whatever goals you may have.
So if you want to take the next step in improving your health, go to lumen .me slash PT to get 15 % off your Lumen.
That's L -U -M -E -N .M -E slash PT for 15 % off your purchase.
Thank you, Lumen, for sponsoring this episode.
Last up, this episode sponsored by BetterHelp.
You ever thought about picking up a new hobby or learning something entirely different?
You know, as kids, we're always exploring, we're discovering new things.
But as adults, that sense of curiosity can sometimes fade away.
What happened to us?
Maybe you've always wanted to learn gardening.
Maybe you've wanted to dive into a new language, finally beat your best friend in bowling.
Therapy can help you reconnect with that sense of wonder.
I've personally seen how therapy can help.
Definitely was a big part of my development over the years.
So many examples where instead of spinning my tires for years of my life, maybe, I got that insight from a good therapist that's always on your team.
It really can be someone that changes the course of your whole life, if you think about it.
And on that note, I would always say to approach anything that can change your life with extreme caution.
But if you're thinking of starting therapy, give BetterHelp a try.
It's entirely online, designed to be convenient, flexible, and suited to your schedule.
Just fill out a brief questionnaire to get matched with a licensed therapist, and you can switch therapists at any time for no additional charge.
Take off the mask with BetterHelp.
Visit BetterHelp .com slash fill this today to get 10 % off your first month.
That's BetterHelp. H -E -L -P dot com slash fill this.
And now back to the podcast.
Let me explain this point a bit more.
Of course, we know that with Heidegger, he would think that when it comes to a word like consciousness, part of the reason it's so surrounded by mystery and what can seem like paradoxes is because it's ultimately a category error.
We're trying to describe something in the ontological realm purely with words and rational constrictions that only make sense in the realm of the ontics, subjects, and objects, that there seem to be hard limits to what rational parameters like words can ever hope to describe.
But consider the supply to these mystical experiences we're talking about more generally.
Simon Critchley says that when you consider the list of people who have claimed to have these experiences that we have records of, people like Julian of Norwick, she was a medieval Catholic.
Meister Eckhart, he was a Dominican monk.
Rumi, who was a Sufi mystic.
Marguerite Perret, she was another Christian.
One thing that starts to seem clear, he says, if you just look at the examples, is that having a concept in the way that you frame the world, for the divine, or for God, or for something greater than yourself, just having that concept available to you in the way that you frame things, seems to highly
increase your chances of having one of these mystical experiences that lead to this deeper connection with being.
And it's like, okay, if I believe in a leprechaun, it's way easier to believe there's a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.
But what does that have anything to do with my reality?
Well, think about how as a modern, scientifically minded person, what our tendencies often are for categorizing the types of experiences we have.
If you're out on a hike or something, you're walking along a trail and you see the sunlight shooting through the trees around you, all around you, you feel the wind on your face, you smell the trees and the dirt and you're coming up to a clearing.
And when you witness the view at this clearing, the rolling hills, as far as you can see, it's like a carpet of life that you're somewhere in the middle of just lost within it.
And if you were to see that and you were to feel a sense of overwhelm start to come over you, just a humility, a wonder at what the heck all this even is.
And if you feel that wonder start to build, and then you feel it start to turn into something else, it feels very weird to you.
What do we often do in this kind of moment?
Well, we instantly start trying to rationally subordinate the moment and the feelings going on and turn them into things that we can understand, manipulate and optimize for efficiency.
For example, this feeling of overwhelm that I'm having, well, you know, I did get only about six hours of sleep last night.
Everything is a little much for me today.
And that curiosity that I feel it's really just something that's a survival mechanism for me trying to get knowledge about my environment.
And that humility. Well, my stepdad was pretty hard on me when I was a kid.
So of course, my first instinct when I was faced with something so powerful would be to feel humble.
It's like nowhere was there ever an opportunity here for you to feel a part of anything deeper.
You were always just keeping it at arm's length through rationally categorizing it into something that you can control.
Simon Critchley has an entire confession section in the book on mysticism, where he describes one of these experiences of letting this constant doubt and never being vulnerable to prevent him from feeling something that was maybe life changing.
And one of these moments that he was having is a common place we can find ourselves in and couple this with another place we often find ourselves in in the modern world.
Any time you get five seconds to sit and just be with the world around you and pay attention to it, you're scrolling through your phone.
And it's often something that's such a shallow take of reality that how could it ever offer a perspective shift?
It's often designed purposefully to reinforce your bias and get you even further locked in to the way you're framing things.
With how much media is designed to just make you scared all the time and constantly worried about the future?
How could you ever summon the vulnerability in your experience of things that's required for you to have one of these experiences, if you're constantly needing to keep shields up to feel like you're protecting yourself?
Simon Critchley says that adulthood just in general as most people live it these days, adulthood is what he calls the abdication of ecstasy.
We live so much of our lives as adults obsessing over ourselves and our own egos that it makes it next to impossible for us to experience this entire other side of what life can be.
I mean for most people that are alive today that are responsible adults in quotes, when are we ever in a place where we're not doing something?
When are ever in a situation where we can just put aside everything for a while and feel some of this juicy no -self ecstasy that Critchley's talking about?
It's incredibly rare.
Now contrast this with what it was like to live as some of these devoted religious followers did that claim to have these mystic experiences.
Imagine Julian of Norrick.
She was somebody that lived through the bubonic plague.
She was tucked away in a tiny cell as what's called an anchoris and she spent most of her time devoting herself to contemplation or prayer with her life cut down to the absolute essentials.
Silence, solitude, scripture, and the rawness of our own thoughts.
Imagine living a life like that.
Like how much would insecurity be something that rules your life in that place?
Or take Meister Eckhart.
He was a Dominican monk that lived during a time where to be an intellectual anywhere close to the realm of philosophy involved you spending thousands of hours of your life deeply studying the religious texts that dominated the halls of thought at the time.
In other words, you didn't have a cell phone to turn to, you just sacrificed a big piece of yourself over to this near constant process of religious contemplation.
So anyway, part of the reason I even bring this up is to say that if you're having a hard time getting to a place that one of these people are describing, don't be too hard on yourself.
I mean, you're living in a world that makes it incredibly difficult to gain access to this in the first place.
But say you still really wanted to, you say, look, I'm going to find some time.
I'm going to make this experience happen.
Well, still you could be in a place where you're like, okay, fine.
But didn't you say this stuff's way easier if you already have a belief in some sort of higher power?
But maybe I don't have a belief in any of that stuff.
Look, I don't believe in God objectively, phenomenologically, ergonomically, any of that stuff.
How am I ever supposed to get to a place like Meister Eckhart?
Nice name, by the way.
From the moment he's saying his ABCs is viewing himself in terms of how he relates to God's kingdom.
That's just not something I have at my disposal here.
But one thing Critchley might recommend is to not see this as a zero sum game where you're having a mystical experience, feeling a total disillusion of the self, or else you're not having anything.
There's many different shades of mystical experiences, and it may in fact be necessary for you to experience these things at a lower level of intensity before it's possible for you to navigate to the places of these famous mystics who people are still talking about.
And especially if you're lacking religious language to help you navigate and understand the feelings you're having in these experiences, developing this kind of connection is definitely going to be a process for you.
Still, if you wanted to start somewhere, Simon Critchley thinks you're actually living in one of the most privileged times ever to be able to access this sort of stuff.
Reason being, he says, is that it used to be the case that to have one of these mystic experiences, you would need to be a devoted follower of a religion of some sort.
But he says something happened, notably after the Protestant Reformation in the Western world, where these experiences became sort of democratized in a way that had never really been available before.
All of a sudden, it was possible for someone to feel variations of these things through artwork and aesthetic experiences more generally.
All of a sudden, things like poetry become a type of expression that most people who are interested could pick up and read and use it as an access point into experiences that can help us see the limits of a purely rational understanding of the world.
You know, it's not a coincidence that so many of the people we'd call mystics from the history of the world have turned to poetry as a way to express these experiences when normal language doesn't seem to do the trick.
It should be said, Heidegger also, in his later work, makes a similar sort of move.
He says so often the language we use frames reality in terms of the ontic by default.
Every sentence we say is structured in a way that's about subjects acting on and manipulating a realm of objects, you know.
John emptied the trash can.
Susan got a new job yesterday.
But see, poetry is different.
Poetry is a type of art that really does open things up to a whole different kind of expression.
Because so often, poetry is written from a human subjective point of view.
The human experience is often presupposed when you're reading a poem.
Take one example of this from an excerpt of a poem called The Great Wagon by the legendary Sufi mystic known as Rumi.
Compare the subject object sentence structure to the way that he's writing here.
Quote, Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and right doing, there is a field.
I'll meet you there.
When the soul lies down in that grass, the world is too full to talk about.
Ideas, language, even the phrase each other doesn't make any sense.
End quote. The story's the same from so many mystics over the course of history.
Whatever it is they're experiencing in this place where the self dissolves and they're always already a part of something bigger that they can't really express, poetry just feels to them like it gets a bit closer to what that is than ordinary language possibly can.
But Simon Critchy says if you're a modern person, you got all the resources we typically have available to us.
There's no reason for you to restrict yourself to just poetry.
If you want to explore this stuff more deeply, he says in the book that there is no such thing as an atheist when you're listening to the music you love.
In other words, music, he thinks is another very effective access point into this whole area.
Cause as he says in a world that's often completely shaped by things like money and disenchantment, music becomes something that reanimates it.
You can just lose yourself and listening to a song at a level that involves a kind of surrender of the ego that's similar to one of these mystical experiences.
Now don't get him wrong.
He's not saying it's the same.
He's not saying that this is equivalent to following a devotional practice for years of your life.
But look, if you wanted to use the tools you have as a modern person to start moving in this direction a bit more, you could do a lot worse than trying to push yourself aside and feel music as deeply as possible.
And as a musician himself, it's one of these gateways into this more immediate experience with reality that he personally has a lot to say about in the book.
Another access point Simon Critsey talks about is the power of a deep reading of a philosophical text as a substitute for one of these religious texts.
Again, it's not going to be the same thing, but if you take it seriously enough, if you read a work of philosophy with some real humility, if you're truly working to surrender yourself over to the process of internalizing these ideas, particularly a type of philosophy that tries to challenge the limits
of human thought. This definitely also has the potential to get you more into this place where you're letting be and allowing ideas and new ways of thinking to reveal themselves rather than projecting yourself onto them.
And probably many people listening to this can relate to just how transformative something like philosophy can be if it's done right.
Now imagine it with theological guidance and language to help navigate that experience better.
So I guess the through line here that just needs to be said is that it's highly unlikely you're going to just listen to a song one day or read a new philosophy book and just fall onto the ground and start convulsing.
My life is changed.
Hooray. No, just like I was saying last time with Heidegger's philosophy, this change will often go down most of the time in very small increments over the course of months or years of your life, little openings going on prying you more and more in the direction of seeing things without so many filters
on all the time. And yes, meditation, nature, fasting, prayer, religion, reading, music, any of these things and more can be a slight move in that direction of getting a little more freedom from the will.
And it's my belief that this book by Simon Critchley is written to be another one of these things that can start to shift your thinking towards this direction.
I mean, throughout it, he goes over a ton of examples of the stories of these mystical experiences, always with the modern reader in mind sympathetic to the fact that it is a very difficult thing to access just because of the default way our modern world is situated.
But beyond any personal benefits somebody might get from reading this book, I think it actually does a great job of showing how an area of human thought like mysticism is again not irrational at heart.
Mysticism is a tendency more than anything to Simon Critchley.
And while over the years it's been slandered and it's been made into something that's the antonym to philosophy, from his vantage point, the one he's trying to present in the book, it's actually an area of human thought that's become highly neglected because of this misunderstanding.
And that since we're already in this place mysticism actually has a lot of ways that it could benefit human thought if we were more open to it or took it more seriously.
Anyway, the book is called On Mysticism, The Experience of Ecstasy.
Hope you enjoyed this one.
Let me know if you'd be interested in exploring more about these different framings of reality.
I find it fun. I've always wanted to do the Kyoto School, by the way.
So for anyone who doesn't know, it's a very unique blend of Eastern and Western philosophy that was done in the 20th century around existentialism.
There were some real philosophical beasts that were part of the Kyoto School.
I'd love to talk about it.
But before I would ever do anything like that, I need to know if people are even interested in hearing about it.
Let me know. Send me a message if you get a second this week.
As usual, thank you everyone for making this show possible.
Patreon .com slash philosophize this.
And as always, thank you for listening.
I'll talk to you next time.
