John Mikes wrote: >Somehow I missed rwas's reply detailing those 'experiences. Could anybody >supply them to me? Or perhaps C. Goodwin himself who now wrote: > >"Mystic experiences of course. Experiences which have rendered >understanding which makes participating in the predominate discourse >found on this list very painful to endure. Sequential, temporal, >in-the-box thinking is not how to transcend the physical in my view." > >Maybe this paragraph is the answer. In which case I rest my case.
It was not Goodwin's answer you quoted, but rwas's one. So indeed that paragraph is the answer or part of the answer you seek. About mystic experiences I tend to believe awareness or consciousness is sort of degree 1 mystic experiences, and I would not be astonished that the psychology of machine entails a vast number of variate possible "mystical" experiences, but all belongs to G* minus G and would be uncommunicable/unprovable (like consciousness). But I am skeptical about *direct* use of mystic experiences *against* attempts of third person communications among searchers. (Note that there could be positive inspirations from *any* personal experience, mystic or not). Bruno
