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
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).