![Three types of soul [1222x4777 - 1.33MB]](https://pic8.co/sh/wDKgWu.jpg){kind=link}
I wish mystics wouldn't flirt with philosophy; you invariably just end up robbing it of any credibility it could have as a logical discipline. I'm by no means against relgion/spirituality, but ffs just stay in your lane.
I wish mystics wouldn't flirt with philosophy; you invariably just end up robbing it of any credibility it could have as a logical discipline. I'm by no means against relgion/spirituality, but ffs just stay in your lane.
There is no lane. All such divisions are artificial and arbitrary.
There is no lane. All such divisions are artificial and arbitrary.
Mystics rely upon faith and feeling to answer certain existential questions, whereas empiricist philosophers stick with logic & predictive efficacy.
Those are the essential lanes, and they are not arbitrary at all. There is no shame in honestly admitting one turns to faith to come to terms with some aspects of existence, the only shame is in polluting the discipline of philosophy in a misguided quest to give mysticism a veneer of logical credibility.
Mystics rely upon faith and feeling to answer certain existential questions, whereas empiricist philosophers stick with logic & predictive efficacy.
Those are the essential lanes, and they are not arbitrary at all. There is no shame in honestly admitting one turns to faith to come to terms with some aspects of existence, the only shame is in polluting the discipline of philosophy in a misguided quest to give mysticism a veneer of logical credibility.
(post is archived)