Not in this epoch

I imagine WJ might write differently, if he met some of the not-so-humble-and-tender fundamentalists of this epoch in America… the ones who think their "deep state" savior is a grifting, lying, pathologically narcissistic real estate mogul. They've clearly been affected by a different sort of modification.

"…in Christians of different epochs it is always one and the same modification by which they are affected: there is veritably a single fundamental and identical spirit of piety and charity, common to those who have received grace; an inner state which before all things is one of love and humility, of infinite confidence in God, and of severity for one's self, accompanied with tenderness for others."

— The Varieties of Religious Experience by William James(Annotated) by william james
https://a.co/1OMg6dz

“Saintliness,” and Thoreau at home in “the sweet and beneficent society” of nature

I am one of those who finds the word and the doctrinal ideal of saintliness "off-putting," at least when miracles are alleged.

But Robert Richardson is right, it is possible to understand people like HDT as secular or naturalistic "saints" in a non-supernatural sense. Their emotional center is "religious" only in that generous Jamesian big-tent way that admits "whatever they may consider the divine"… even the "higher power" of Henry's gentle rain and Pine needles.

So I'd prefer to leave the likes of Calvin and Jonathan Edwards out of it. But I'm not James.

Richardson:

""Saintliness" is an ill-chosen, off-putting word for many people, and the position of these lectures deep in the Varieties, which is already filled with attractive (and now of course famous) subjects—the religion of healthy-mindedness, the sick soul, conversion, and mysticism—means that the chapters on saintliness are apt to get less attention than the others. But it should be remembered that the five saintliness lectures constitute a full quarter of the entire two-year project, and that what James means by saintliness is how religious experience affects practical everyday life.

From the point of view of James the pragmatist, then, these chapters are the clincher; the whole venture stands or falls here, where James proposes that we judge religious experiences by their fruits, by their value for living. This is, in the old language of Calvinism, the question of sanctification, saintliness, the idea that if you were indeed saved, you would thereby be enabled to lead a good life here and now. It is one more idea James found he shared with Jonathan Edwards. "Old fashioned hell-fire Christianity well knew how to extract from fear its full equivalent in the way of fruits for repentance, and its full conversion value." 6

James dives in by declaring simply that "the best fruits of religious experience are the best things that history has to show." Put in personal, psychological terms, "the man who lives in his religious center of personal energy, and is actuated by spiritual enthusiasm differs from his previous carnal self in perfectly definite ways." The saintly character, then, is "the character for which spiritual emotions are the habitual center of the personal energy," and such a person seems to James to possess, on the whole, four fundamental inner conditions. First is "a feeling of being in a wider life than this world's selfish little interests." Second is "a sense of the friendly continuity of the ideal power with our own life, and a willing self-surrender to its control." Third is "an immense elation and freedom, as the outlines of the confining self-hood melt down." Fourth is "a shifting of the emotional center towards loving and harmonious affections," a shifting toward the yes! yes! of emotional impulses and away from the no! no! of our inhibitions. 7

These inner conditions, taken together, have, says James, "characteristic practical consequences," which are asceticism, strength of soul, purity, and charity. With this rough scheme—just an armature, really, not an argument but something to hold up an argument—James proceeds to flesh it out with examples. His first example of the practical effect of a feeling of the presence of a higher and friendly power is from Henry Thoreau, who recorded the following experience in Walden:

Once, a few weeks after I came to the woods, for an hour, I doubted if the near neighborhood of man was not essential to a serene and healthy life. To be alone was something unpleasant. But in the midst of a gentle rain while these thoughts prevailed, I was suddenly sensible of such sweet and beneficent society in Nature, in the very pattering of the drops, and in every sound and sight around my house, an infinite and unaccountable friendliness all at once like an atmosphere sustaining me, as made the fancied advantages of human neighborhood insignificant, and I have never thought of them since. Every little pine needle expanded and swelled with sympathy and befriended me. I was so distinctly made aware of the presence of something kindred to me, that I thought no place could ever be strange to me again…"

— William James: In the Maelstrom of American Modernism by Robert D. Richardson
https://a.co/injXqCZ

The Varieties of Religious Experience Lectures 14-15-The Value of Saintliness

Lec 14-15-The Value of Saintliness

Now to analyze the value of saintliness, and certainly we must test it by the human value of its fruits and in regards if it truly is good or not. Certainly, our own disbelieves can even be a theology of its own dogmatism thus we must stay a bit radical and take a step back. However, the reality of God here certainly must be judged as much of religion tends towards social arrangements, perspectives and needs change throughout generations. Thus, the particular God revered changes if only in a need to take seriously. A prior God of cruel appetites was certainly worshipped as at one point its “fruits were relished” (328). Now with a lack of effort towards X worship such fruits may not be accessible anymore. By this we can now analyze religious extents with saintliness. By James, “if it commands itself, then any theological beliefs that may inspire it, in so far forth, will stand accredited” (331). And if not then be discredited to the survival of the fittest of other religious beliefs. Collective and individual needs feeling violated? In comes new and/or evolved faiths.

            Now, in addressing some vague factors James, in regards of ‘the many’ problem, aims at a sort of objective certainty and he argues our empirical methods are not skepticism rather it is about recognizing the imperfections of our instruments of understanding and that we must utilize observations to gain better truth for future understandings, something dogmatism will forever contrast. And, certainly it is best to be open and receptive for any future provisional truths as, “when half-gods go, the Gods arrive” (333). Thus, religious diversity is inescapable as different types of religious function are best for different people at different times. Next, James notes an importance in distinguishing individual personal religion from institutional, corporate, or tribal religion (334). Historically speaking, religious geniuses tend to attract followers and create sympathizers (334), then when amassed enough followers and momentum they themselves become institutional, bound to contaminate what was originally innocent (335). Now, certainly such saintly lives argue a strong loneliness with many religious experiences drive particular individuals ‘into the wilderness’ with examples such as Buddha, Jesus, Mohammed, even George Fox (335). We get an example of George Fox, Quaker founder. He was strongly self-isolated even practicing in walks and fasting and also carried many sorrows of the Lord inside him. In his troubles he gave everything up to the Lord, even his family relations, mom, dad, and friends. He became a stranger on earth but with the Lord inclined to his heart. Others gave him anxiety, even priests, but hearing Jesus and he jumps with joy. With Christ he could overcome his human relations. His relatives would have been happy to relieve him of his condition, but Christ took him as he was and he left his care to him alone.

            Such appears as a lonely madman to many but may prove contagious to some and if enough it may form an orthodox and “it's days of inwardness is over: the spring is dry” (337). Instantly the institution persists in contrasting spite of individual ‘spiritual bloomings’ with many saints or prophets being strong examples. Many religious disregards center around the cons of such religious institution domains. With many also bigotries tied to ‘the spirit of dogmatic dominion’. Generally, by the combination of both institutional and individual dominions we find the ecclesiastical spirit. With religious, or even general human bigotry such as neophobia, “piety becomes a mask” (338). But enough blame of piety, James argues, if only now to blame it at most for not keeping possessions in check or for supplying hypocritical pretexts (338). Of course, hypocrisies do impose obligations and with passions in piety it may bring a repentance possibly never otherwise known (338). Thus, it is not religion’s part to blame but it's “overzealousness or fanaticism” (338) that tends to follow. That will be our next point, but first a preliminary remark.

            Concerning religious saintliness there certainly are appeals of extravagance. So, are factors necessary? Are ascetic practices necessary? Certainly, extremes are not the only range for people in such religious regards and like all else most generally balances between extremes but often practitioners reduce away from advising others (339). Our lack of extravagance lies near this “middle line of human effort” (339), not dependent upon particular beliefs or doctrines, nor age, nor other denominational factors (339). Thus, all fruits are relative and certainly “liable to corruption by excess” (339). A balance is necessary, if not, James argues, “spiritual excitement takes pathological forms whenever other interests are too few and the intellect too narrow” (340). Now to discuss saintly corruptions by excess, first starting with excessive devoutness as fanaticism being the common vice, or also said as, “loyalty carried to a convulsive extreme” (340). James argues this is common for narrow minded people newly grasping a phenomenal moment, one to them worthy of immense devotion. Then turning into a near idolization of the active devotion itself even with “languages altered in the attempts to praise him enough” (341). And certainly, near legendary humans gather in such regards, a strong fruit of religion with examples such as Christ and his followers, or Buddha and his followers. With James arguing, such regards are rather silly and but “man's misguided propensity to praise” (342). With an immediate consequence of such as “jealousy for the deities honor” (342) and with very narrow minds it may become a central preoccupation. Or even lead to crusades. This saintly temperament is certainly a moral temperament that often requires cruelty (342) as against supporters of Satan or religious antagonists. Many times, it becomes hard to distinguish between religion and fanaticism but certainly fanaticism is on the wrong side of religions regard. Generally, fanaticism only arises within aggressive temperaments for feeble extremes and it disbalances often as “an imaginative absorption into the love of God to the exclusion of all practical human interests” (343). “A mind too narrow has room for one kind of affection. When the love of God takes possession of such a mind, it expels all human loves and human uses. (343). Such excessive devotion is best known as, a theopathic condition or the experience or ability to experience ‘divine illumination’. We get an example of a person whose feelings of divine receptivity are so powerful that she prays for it to relax to be able to perform everyday life. Often also having hallucinations bringing revelations of Christ and hearing him say that he did this, choosing her to spread such love to the world. He then reaches in her chest and swaps her heart with his spiritual one. Certainly, monumental but what of the fruits? In James's further research little else but sufferings, prayers, absent mindedness, swoons, and ecstasies (344). “She became increasingly useless about the covenant, her absorption in Christ's love” (344). With many friends trying to bring her back down to earth “they had to leave her in her heaven” (345). James argues, admirable but feeble. Concerning such inferior intellectual sympathies, the fruits are near worthless (346). And in comparing with ancient fruits yielded they certainly come across as rather shallow. With an example being of Saint Teresa, an inspiration and psychology, willpower, politics, and certainly religious service but James argues, in contemporary contextual readings she come across as pity, as her strong soul found such poor employment (347). And, in spite of her sufferings, certainly existed a superficial composition. Now James utilizes Dr. Jordan 's ideological ‘shrew’ and ‘non-shrew’ types of people. Shrews are motor types and non-shrews are sensory types of people with expressions more energetic than initial feelings. In general, Saint Theresa was a shrew; received invisible favors via Christ and then immediately felt ought to document and export to those in need. Her consistent egoism concerned her faults and imperfections and generally with a return of humility, covers her ego with confusion upon coming to. James argues, such regards are typical of shrewdom. Saint Teresa hated Lutherans, she generally saw religion as a relative flirtation between human and divine, and other than general health for nuns little human regard was seen in her however, certainly she was revered as superhuman (348). There are similar regards to all sainthood as a God minute in actions and favor is a certain small mindedness. With examples of Luther in discussing the churches sin/debt observation thus saving religious depth and maturity. So much for devotion detached from intellectual conceptions that may offer better fruits (348).

Next to address excesses of purity. Such prior theopathic individuals refuse to mix God's love with other types of love (348), with mom, dad, family, and friends considered too distracting. Many pietists need to abolish disorder for order while some are more comfortable accepting it in the world in full (348) while also personalizing a small world of dwelling for themselves. Those that flee the world, such as a monastery, all generally do so with similar regards, to unify life and simplify “the spectacle presented to the soul” (349). For many sensitive people things must be dropped one after another in relation to the consciousness's absorption into spiritual regards (349). And for many others to trek outside of their preset dwelling is rather unsteady. Often many saintly individuals will want restriction self or externally imposed; intertwined in monotony and a zealot for purity (350). We get an example of an excess of purity, Saint Louis of Gonzaga, of whom in youth highly disregarded external realities to an unadmirable point. With a vow of chastity, he gained an immediate inhibition of temptations unpure, a very rare occurrence. His disgust with it turned into disgust with the opposite sex. He never looked up in public and refused to be alone with any woman even his mother. Then at 17 he joins the Jesuit order and becomes a monumental monk but also in his time sought out “unjust reprimands as opportunities of humility” (353), he refused to give another paper until permission from his superior, God. He died at 29 and was then seen as a saint for the youthful. His case was attempts of purification via elimination. However, a final judgment certainly rests with the conception of God in what conduct of actions he appreciates most (354). Regarding a general 16th century Catholic they probably have little regard of social righteousness rather, with more attention to individual salvation and with the devil left to the world (354). This certainly contrasts strongly with contemporary moral sentiments of helping others especially within divine regards. James argues, other than heroic stories of action Louis, with an intellect “no larger than a pin’s head, and cherishes ideas of God corresponding smallness” (354) is not pleasing in general. Certainly, purity alone is not the right way about this as many times it is of greater use to deal with some impurities than to disregard usefulness to remain pure (354).

Next, to analyze excesses of tenderness and charity; often “preserving the unfit, in breeding parasites and beggars” (355). ‘Resist not evil’ and ‘love your enemies’; are saints justified by such extremes? James argues a perfect conduct comes in relating 3 regards, the actor, object of action, and reception of actions by others (355). The best of intentions fails if by false means or bad reception (355) thus one cannot judge by one factor alone. Saints easily can and do give away too much importance to personal enemies, “by non-resistance cut off his own survival” (355). By H. Spencer, only perfect conduct appears with perfect environment and with saintly conduct as generally the most perfect conduct within the environments of such saint (356). In often is confessed by us all that virtuous regard such as charity, sympathy, in non-resistance manage to grow in excess and many times are taken advantage of (356). For many it is easy to get lost in such inhumanities and for it to reduce our realities  and imaginations. In that, saints in their extravagances prove superhuman role models of humanity and tenderness. By James's regard Saints are leavens, as Saints certainly present a “genuine creative force” (357; the authors and increasers of genuine goodness (357). For many this is nearly incomprehensible and through life they have only continued hardening. For them saints may be useful and able to soften, convert, or regenerate (357). Even photos of prior, to take advantage of good welfare, certainly they are not incurable as with Saints, as the great ‘torchbearers’ of such beliefs, to the people that need them (357). And whether charitable actions are taken advantage of or truly appreciated is only known through trial and error. Force may destroy enemies but non-resistance, if done correctly, makes enemies into friends thus with charity superior (358). “This practical proof that worldly wisdom may be safely transcended is the saint’s magic gift to mankind” (358-359). But humans certainly confess an inconsistency to maintain such saintly values and they then change habits. Thus, the saint transmutes earth to a more heavenly order (360)

Next, to address excesses of asceticism. So, if such a saintly inner disposition for someone then why such extreme mortifications? Well, it over regards one's external; when truly emancipated from flesh sees pleasure and pains, abundance and scarcity, as irrelevant and indifferent (361). Thus, can engage in actions without fear of corruption as Saint Augustine said, “if you only love God enough you may safely follow all your inclinations” (361). Buddhist middle way: stay away from extremes as with them excess mortifications are unworthy and become pleasures (361). True peace here is through inner wisdom thus ascetic practice. Now it's certainly easy for us to see a set of practices pathological so it would be worth distinguishing general good intentions of asceticism versus some of its more useless aspects. Spiritually speaking asceticism is a general regard of twice borns of at least signaling something wrong with the world and can only be met with an appeal to the soul and its saintly heroic resources. With healthy mindedness reliable to some but shallow for twice borns, their true deliverance is rather universal. “Pain and wrong and death must be fairly met and overcome in higher excitement” (363). That one could die a horrid death but feel all the while they were never quite in the know of life or the ‘great initiation’ (363) this James argues, this is how ascetics think, volunteering for such initiation.

There seems to be a common human instinct of reality, one that we pay to see others act out in front of us at a theater, in many heroisms the main meeting may forever stay a mystery. And while most of us cling to a flower, another throws it away without a second thought a factor deeply regarding them as a natural born superior (364). “He who feeds on death that feeds on men possesses life supereminently and excellently, and meets best the secret demands of the universe, is the truth of which asceticism has been the faithful champion” (364). James argues thus, asceticism exists with a more profound regard of existence (364). Now James likes to note concerning poverty, militarism and volunteerism also serving as possible equivalents. High materiality is certainly notorious to contaminate culture and by this James argues that many people would redirect such an interest to factors such as athletics, militarism, adventures, etc. (365), remarkable factors that help fuel heroic energy. An example being that war certainly inhibits a tender subjective with its intense demands; with war also a reality also rather “incongruous with ordinary human nature” (366). Now to direct towards poverty, certainly a strenuous life and contemporary people have grown afraid of it. Generally finding poverty repulsive all the while forgetting a main ancient point, “the liberation from material attachments” (368). Our worth is us not our stuff. However, wealth certainly is generally helpful and more beneficial than intense poverty and should generally be chosen. But wealth only affects so much in excesses concerning focus on gaining or not losing, causing conflicts of cowardice and corruption (368). In many cases the wealthy become slaves while a person in poverty lives with no terrors and lives as a free individual (368).

Now, quick review before concluding; a main question has been does “religion stand approved by its fruits?” (369). Certainly, individual saintly traits exist in non-religious individuals. A whole group forms as a religion by combination with the divine feeling within the psychological basis and in such cases individuals tend to think “the smallest details of this world derive infinite significance from their relation to an unseen divine order” (369) with such supplying massive feelings of satisfaction, steadfastness of the soul, and even exemplary serviceability (369) sympathies become contagious and saintly individuals place a higher regard on inner excitements than general people, converts discomforts to joys, declining no duty, is more reliable than generally anyone, and their ascetics save petty temperaments and pretensions notorious for corruptibility. Thus, purity is highly useful in such regards to keep accessibility close (370). With felicity then purity, charity, patience, and self-severity certainly are remarkable traits common to saints. But again, such factors are not flawless, with a narrow intellect arises tendencies such as, “holy excesses, fanaticism, or theopathic absorption, self-torment, prudery, scrupulosity, gullibility, and morbid inability to meet the world” (370). Intense fidelities become possible to damn a saint more than the average person. As we saw our judgments of Saints must be intellectual as well as sentimental and also it is best to judge Saints within ideal environments (370). James also notes that narrowness of mind is not always a vice and many times it is contextually based. Also, to note, many saintly essentials are accidents such as fleeing to a monastery and gaining essential saintly traits. Many critics, especially Nietzsche, note their dislike of saintly nature. For Nietzsche, it comes across as a negative reaction to general human instinctual nature, in this regard an instinct of tribal survival (371). With a leader’s consciousness comes the responsibility of transmitting possibilities of doom to the people. A saint’s ontology is rather a unique appeal from average; the world of fables to act within, personified relations with nature, where women supposedly admire tough adversities of such saintly men, denying rulers accountability, and with individuals highly suggestible in opposing point of views (372). For Nietzsche, saintliness is next to slavishness, the “degeneration par excellence” (372) with a saint’s influence on others toxic, this fear incites the strong to be tyrannical with denial of it. A take of Nietzsche’s antipathy that James calls sickly, the strongman or strong person finds only morbidness out of saintly gentleness. All revolving around two main factors: one, should we adapt concern of the seen or unseen world? And two, in the seen world, should such means of adaptation be of aggression or non-resistance (373)? Certainly, by some regard both worlds need a note taken by individuals, with all sides certainly serving use; rather this is a question of degree and intensity. Is tough or tender minded more viable? Empirically speaking such regards are matters of relation and thus generally relative and never absolute. The best test of any regard is by social function as “ideality in conduct is altogether a matter of adaptation” (374); only tough minded and it will destroy itself; only tender minded and you have no structure.

A saint may hold the highest value in the appropriate environment but many times we make ourselves saints at times of peril. From abstract to action many times saints are poorly adapted thus in comparing with strong men or persons we must compare with similar compositions in psychology. And in this, many times, saints shine superior. Now, it is certainly common many westerners of religious devotion fall short concerning nonresistance with even Christ fierce at times. Now with success existing within vast dimensions we probably cannot measure it absolutely and certainly it varies from individual (376). As an example of a small point of view, biological, Saint Paul's decapitation makes for a failure, but big point of view and his story is one to pervade historical influence. Thus, a saint as a leaven of the world is a success regardless of flaws; as less theological and more as historical, certainly they hold strong monumentality within influences. “Let us be saints, then, if we can, whether or not we succeed visibly and temporally” (377) but we must adapt to what type suits us best. In concluding the lecture, should we depend upon its truths and not its fruits? Well, if religion is true its fruits are good even if ill adapted in the world and causes problems (377), taking us back to the question of the truth of theology. Thus, to stop this unanswerable cycle James proposes we face responsibility (378). “Religious individuals profess to see truth in a special manner” generally known as mysticism, a topic for next lecture.

--Seth Graves-Huffman

The Varieties of Religious Experience Lectures 11-13-Saintliness

Lec 11-13-Saintliness

So what fruits are truly practical via such happy conversions? Certainly at least seen within human history we have, “the highest flights of charity, devotion, trust, patience, bravery…have been flown for religious ideals” (259-260). Concerning conversion, Sainte-Beauve gives remarks noting that conversion experiences generally invoke a phenomenally extraordinary experience, “for the soul arises thereby at a certain fixed and invisible state… heroic, and from out of which the greatest deeds which it ever performs are executed” (260). Such examples are imminent cases but certainly we have instructive ones. One’s that may push one to regard worldly laws and life's direction near pervasive to nature. So, how does one come to differ so vastly? Certainly, we have numerous individual diversities as our “differing susceptibilities of emotional excitement and in the different impulses and inhibitions” (261), impulses and inhibitions that cross us as ‘yes’s’ and ‘no’s’. An example James argues may be an ill-tempered individual that then has a kid and begins acting remarkable, an “expulsive power of higher affection” (262). Many times certain emotional states may supersede others as sovereign in times of individual necessity, developing a new centering. And not only one always remains sovereign, many times people are internally conflicted of ‘yes’s’ and ‘no’s’ with personal will necessary. An example of being a soldier with fear of being a coward pushes them forward (263), it becomes easy to waver till an emotion eventually feels unambiguous. As such, James argues there certainly exists a ‘pitch of intensity’ that can supersede other emotions and inhibitions, and the impossible becomes possible as inhibitions cease. With examples even of people slicing through others to escape danger. Now James argues certainly nothing destroys inhibitions quite like anger and thus, for many passions, it may be very practical to destroy inhibitions blocking higher regards. Anger costs nothing and is easy to renounce social ties. Now thus far has been temperamental alterations via shifting excitements within an individual. With one liable to a particular emotion they also lose many inhibitions that come with it and there are certainly times individuals are born with an innate genius nature in regard to those particular emotions. For normal people they may only reach such regards from feelings of hopeless inferiority into a second birth. In many ways such geniuses are certainly free of a number of inner turmoils. Now, one practical factor higher excitability commonly brings is courage, “trustful hope will do it” (265), thus making, for many, excitement out of the difficult. And, in concerning willing versus wishing it merely becomes a difference of individual drive; with a certain amount of love, generosity, and loyalty, the results will always dissolve cowardly inhibitions (266).

With all thus far let us now direct all such psychological regards to religious fruits, as the individual now existing with a religious center verse carnal center certainly differs in many definite ways. The ‘no’s’ that ailed him are now gone, factors once impossible are now possible, and the hardness surrounding the heart has broken (267). With James referring in belief that most of us have possibly known such an ontology as “those temporary ‘melting moods’ into which either the trials of real life, or the theater, or a novel sometimes throw us” (267), having catharsis, and finding openings to noble sentiments. For most, the general hardness returns but not with Saints in which such ‘melting moods’ maintain a near uninterrupted control (267). For them self-growth “comes to stay” (268), with backslidings near impossible. However, general people also uncommonly prevent such only as long as their new change is proved with personal evidence. One example is with an alcoholic, “from that hour drink has had no terrors for me” (268) and no remaining temptations made for satisfiable proof for their consistency of conversion. We get another example of a sex addict near suicidal with a phenomenal experience of the Holy Ghost permanently removing his cravings. In these cases, it is as if one is a giant cube who finally pulled the lever to turn over from side A to B, which no gravity or effect can easily turn it back over (271). Such sudden abolition, and also in hypnotic regards, we certainly see subliminal influences present. And suggestive therapeutics certainly warrant strong results. Thus, people have regards to induced change and if through God, such access would be from the subliminal veil in this regard.

Now it is best to regard the religious fruits within this; and generally, the ripest of such fruits warrant the title of saintliness as the “saintly character is the character for which spiritual emotions are the habitual center of the personal energy” (271). And certainly, we have particular universal saintliness within all religions, generally with a conviction of God, a spirit that can interrelate with humans; seen with in goodness, truth, in beauty; they feel the presence everywhere; and can identify what separates humans from God, one, any self-searching and, two, any sensuality. Both hide God in a veil of darkness, with the path of the just always shining bright (271-272). Now we reach such fruits of religious saintliness, to begin, 1, a feeling of being in a wider reality generally with a strong conviction of an ‘ideal power’ (272). Two, a sense of friendly continuity of the ideal power, always with the willingness of self-surrender. Three, an intense “elation and freedom” (273) as the ego dissolves. Four, a “shifting of emotional center towards loving and harmonious affections, towards ‘yes, yes’” (273). Now with such fruits we certainly have in regards that face practical consequences, in this case we also have several, of which we will letter. A, asceticism, or discipline, in this self-surrender becomes self-immolation and possibly superseding inhibitions thus, “measuring and expressing as they do the degree of his loyalty to the higher power” (273). B, we have strength of the soul; as the world feels larger it may make prior concerns feel too insignificant to notice anymore, fears go and bliss stays. C, purity; the shifting of emotional centers generally brings an increase in purity, sensitivity to spiritual discords, a cleansing of existence from brutal to sensual. Generally, individuals remain hidden from the world and often purity takes an ascetic turn with the weakness of flesh treated severely (274). D, charity; shifting one's emotional center, it commonly brings an increase in charity, one with higher empathy for all living creatures. “The saint Loves his enemies and treats loathsome beggars as his brothers” (274).

Now for some concrete examples starting with the presence of an ideal power. In a Christian regard many may feel that with a loss of personal independence comes the compensation of an absence of all fear, a strong inner security. We get an example of a sermon that believes for many strong followers God comes and goes often and that drives away all fear and it is in the closeness with God that maintains the security of “a state of mind equally ready to be safe or meet injury” (275). Next, to address peace of mind and charity; charity and brotherly love are factors certainly common within religious history. In such regard, brotherly love comes from the “assurance of God's friendly presence” (278). Christ’s charity in ‘love your enemy’ is to help make them children of God, such a powerful theistic basis certainly helps to understand individual humility and charity via spiritual excitements. The subject’s mind is closed against envy, hatred, and vindictiveness, and wholly transformed into benevolence, indulgence, and mercy” (280). A natural affinity between tenderness and joy, their place in sainthood is clear. We get an example of such tenderness of whom finds a love for all mankind, their enemies, and sits far off from able to judge another. Certainly, such charity can “efface all usual human barriers” (281). With an example of a saintly individual in important clothes of whom happily greets a dog on the ground whenever he arrives with no concern of getting dirty, as they believed, for them to reject the dog’s love was to cause ‘moral injury’. Another example of an individual with advice for fighting lets himself get beat in the face without reacting. A day later while down on it, the other comes back and apologizes. He then forgives him and said he already asked God to as well. Certainly, a good example of ‘love your enemies’ thus one is noticing not only one's friends. By the saying, one generally, should de-escalate their own animosities before becoming actions. Thus, rarely is ‘love your enemies’ a literal phrase but, is there an ultimately unifying emotion that dissolves all differences and only allows for friendly relations? (283). “If positive well-wishing could attain so supreme a degree of excitement, those who were swayed by it might well seem superhuman beings” (283). With strong convictions and moral discretion such values can certainly change the world especially concerning “inhibitions of instinctive repugnance” (283). Of which we commonly find 3 associating factors: asceticism, charity, and humility; with examples such as people sharing their “kisses [with] his lepers” (284).

Next, to address the practical benefits of equanimity, resignation, fortitude, and patience that come as fruits (284). “A paradise of inner tranquility” (285), commonly a resultant of faith. And certainly, thus far we have seen numerous examples of feelings of safety within God's presence, something indispensable to many. Generally, such tranquility arrives as a direct result of self-surrender. Now, such tranquil temperaments vary from person to person; some more serious with general resignation, and others more cheerful and of more joyful consent. We get an example of a serious tranquil temperament, of whom takes their life ‘as it is’ and asks nothing more of it, he expects nothing, and all his worth is through his despairs. We get another example, this was a more optimistic tranquil temperament and a resignation more active; perils turned to serenity to heresy to jail with no tears or remorse drawn, “but I found my thoughts so much taken up with God that I had no distinct sense of danger” (287). Certainly, powerful the “contempt of danger which religious enthusiasm produces” (287) and certainly martyrdom becomes a sign of religious victory. We get another example of a person tortured by whip but with every lash feels good in every sense of the term, as, for them, under God all felt of happiness and joy. For many tranquility is a recentering of tenseness to peace, to relax and to disregard one's burdens (289). Abandoning self-responsibilities is certainly a fundamental factor in many religious regards and certainly distinguishes between moral regards (289). We see such also present within mind cure movements, stoicism, Hinduism, and Christianity. In Christianity this is commonly called ‘recollection’; when strongly emphasizes presence of time with a lack of worry of future. Saint Catherine of Genoa argues, “the divine moment was the present moment” (289).

Now we have reached the fruit of purity, it is typical of saintly individuals to be highly sensitive to inner inconsistencies, with confusion growing intolerable (290). One individual reference point becomes spiritual excitement as now anything that weakens the purity of the soul is unspiritual. Commonly, with moral regards when it admits work for God thus sacrifices are common. Such gains sovereignty so purity comes instantly. We get an example of a man quitting tobacco for God, he never used again and always felt close to God. And also, many aesthetic forms certainly appear rather pitiful with examples of early Quakers. In this, some take battle against trivial things such as insincerities within their Christian religious social culture; the doffing of hats felt superficial and insincere. Thus, renouncing such cordial behavior with others by necessity. Other Quakers even rejected titles as they were not found to be important, rather, they were addictive and evil. Now certainly such sensitivities make the external world difficult to live within and by this they only find unity of soul by methods of worldly ‘withdrawing’ (296). “That law which impels the artist to achieve harmony in his composition by simply dropping out whatever jars, or suggests a discord, rules also in the spiritual life” (296). But saintly individuals certainly find such inner purity violated in nearly every direction of secular existence. And certainly, purity is a diligent work near resembling ascetic practices.

Now James aims to distinguish between different forms asceticism may take, in this he presents six types. One, asceticism as ‘moral hardiness’, as one grows disgusted with too much ease (296). Two, maintaining good temperament of factors such as food, clothes, chastity, and bodily apparel, all done certainly as “fruits of the love of purity” (297). Three, or this may be the fruits of love, appealing to an individual's sacrifices happily made in honor of the divine (297). Four, ascetic mortifications and torments extending from pessimism of self and religious finalities. Individuals may feel that in doing penance now that they may gain security for the present or future (297). Five, for the psychopathic, such modifications generally spring irrationally often by fixed or obsessive ideals which becomes that individuals particular challenge to rectify and restabilize their inner composition. Finally, six, ascetic practices can, at rare times, turn painful stimuli into pleasure (297). With many difficulties one can foresee human and church history generally tends to divert others away from ascetic lifestyles.

Now certainly people seek ease and pleasure by instinct and that aesthetic practices certainly appear odd and in extreme forms appears as living paradoxes. As such, the prior dropping of abstractions, to take life as it comes, is complex, needing both stimuli and inhibitions thus, following habitual routines. With experiences generally leaving good or bad impressions. Thus, we are left with immediate sensation but also followed with a secondary like or dislike (298). As seen prior healthy mindedness works for some but is intolerable to others, but also certainly we find a mix as to best “produce the sense of an existence with character and texture and power” (299). Regardless of direction for one, relatively speaking there certainly is the right choice of direction for the individual; or, that all things have conditions best for optimal efficiency as do our souls. With healthy mindedness and twice borns some certainly are happy within the calm and others are tense, and for the latter’s negative ascetic techniques generally develop as consequence. We find general instances of pleasure received from ice baths; this case would reside under ascetic head one ‘moral hardiness’. Next, we get a mixture of aesthetic heads two and three in which asceticism becomes, “more systematic and pronounced” (300), with examples of fasting, mortification with burlap clothing, rocks in shoes, and sleeping on the hard floor. Within one of many religious historical regards the Roman Catholics went further and codified all such, praising it as merits. Now we get an example of a Unitarian preacher with an extreme lack of indulgence even by sleeping or sitting. He recollects that he should only occupy space needed as in this weather any movement let cold hit the skin, certainly elements of hardiness and a love of purity with no pessimism. Next an example under head four; a man wanted to go to a monastery but found them not as dedicated as he. He started sleeping on leaves, intense fasting, praying nine times a day, and in craving bread feels himself a sinner and resorts to eating grass and acorns, while later finding peace with God present; a common hopeless Christian theology incentivizing self-mortification (302). “In the form of loving sacrifice, of spending all we have to show our devotion, ascetic discipline of the severest sort may be the fruit of highly optimistic religious feeling” (302). We get an example; an individual's philosophy is to give up all things as to hold on to anything is also to hold on the troubles. He meditated harsh in the cold and at one point his followers placed a false door in his chamber believing the warmth he felt was from God and praise to God for it. Certainly, he needed full faith to experience as such. We see spontaneous impulses to make sacrifices for the pure love of God, thus classing it under aesthetic head three (303).

Now, in historical dominating churches, notions within such aesthetic practices have always been a “negative one of avoidance of sin” (304) with sin generally following ‘concupiscence’ reality of individual instinctive pleasure and temptation such as pride, sensuality, worldly excitements, and possession (304). And all sources of sin are to be held within check thus there is always a factor of self-mortification. Now, to attend to a true aesthetic practice not deluded from religious institution we have Saint John of the Cross. A 16th century Spanish Mystic with the belief that one should excite all things that most imitate Christ. If something presents itself as pleasurable then reject it in God and Christ honor, Christ, of whom nourished on God. For example, he argues, one tends commonly to take satisfaction at times where the glory of God has no part (305), “deny yourself this satisfaction, mortify your wish to listen” (305). Similar with all sensory senses, “striving to make yourself free from their yokes” (305). Saint John, the radical remedy lies in the mortification of the four great natural passions, joy, hope, fear, and grief” (305). Turn one soul not towards the most easy but the most hard; not towards rest, but labor; not to desire more, but less; not to seek the best, but the worst as to acquire Christ’s love with an adequate point of view of spirit and worldly renunciation (305) as to appreciate taste for all things, lose taste for all things; to know all things, learn to know nothing; to be all things, be willing to be nothing (306). And certainly, with such mystics ‘all’ is better understood as ‘All’ as near synonymous with God. Continuing with Saint John, he argues that to stop at one factor ceases to reveal the ‘All’ to oneself; to come to the ‘All’ one must give up everything to the “All’; if one attains it, to possess it longer one must desire nothing. Here the soul finds tranquility and a new centering. Of such Highness it cannot be taken from below with nothing higher to depress, in his conclusion, desires are the cause of troubles (306). We get another example, this one aiming to tackle ascetic heads four and five but also all of them combined; an example of irrational bodily extremes that pathological individuals may take. A 14th century German mystic named Suso took ascetic practices to extremes of self-torture generally by long deprivations and a good bit of blood and nails. In their case pain did not turn to pleasure. But, through a number of brutal extremes on his 40th year God spoke to him that he had destroyed the natural man and that such exercises are now unnecessary. Another example, with her love of pain insatiable, “nothing but pain… makes my life supportable” (310). In such religious regards generally three branches support self-mortification, chastity, obedience, and poverty.

First, to address obedience. “Obedience may spring from the general religious phenomenon of inner softening and self-surrender and throwing one’s self on higher powers” (311). Such powerful saving attitudes that one cannot possibly see through their fallibilities for the sake of trust and faith maintained thus, resignation is necessary. And, combined with self-despair and self-crucifixion, passion and obedience become an ascetic sacrifice (311). “As a sacrifice, a mode of mortification” (311) commonly within many practices especially Catholicism, “by poverty he immolates his exterior possessions; by chastity he immolates his body; by obedience he completes the sacrifice” (312). For many, such obedience is easy but to explain it is complex. We get an example of a Jesuit authority, for them the greatest monastery benefit is the assurance of whom one obeys. If you have done right then all other concerns can answer to your superior, God. We had another example, one with the desire of a superior to disregard his own bias and help conquer his mind; no human is superior, and all are equal under God, as to assume human superior certainly weakens one spirit of obedience (313) and true recognition of God. With situations of people even “greedy of obedience” (315).

Next up we have the second branch common in self-mortifications, poverty. Certainly, present at all times and creeds within saintly life (315) and generally ownership is rather instinctual thus this also can become a paradox. But the individual certainly does not feel that way by how “easily higher excitements hold lower cupidities in check” (315). We get another example of prior Jesuit Rodriguez, “blessed are the poor in spirit” in this he explains, to better question this, ask oneself if you love poverties effects such as hunger, thirst, cold, fatigue, etc. If you are not glad for them then you only avoid them thus proving the imperfection of one’s spirit of poverty. So, with a vast number of religious groups idolizing poverty what are the spiritual grounds? One, of all general historical regard there has always been some born with little need of possession and rather live with “personal superiorities, the courage, generosity, and pride supposed to be his birthright” (317). For such people the claims that possessions make can be toxic and easily corruptible. We know example of saintliness with Whitefield; everywhere he goes brings the unique voice “go thou and preach the gospel; be a Pilgrim on earth; have no party or certain dwelling place” (318). Even with an example of an anarchists loathe of capital wealth argues that in giving it away makes one beautiful (319). By James, in short, lives with less are generally more free than those based on ‘doing’ or ‘being’. Commonly within spiritual excitements a person throws away possessions, but only private individual interests maintain this as “cowardice creep in with every dollar “(319) so, point of view is enlightening. We now get an example of a monastery monk requesting reading material, denied, then later given too much, overloaded, and his superior monk then argues “a man possesses of learning only so much as comes out of him in action” (320). Certainly, a desire of not having, James argues, is something profound and close to the real mysteries of religion thus giving strong satisfaction (320). And without a full surrender a crisis is not passed, and fear still stands sentinel (320), growing mistrust of the divine. Dividing trust in either us or God with an example of a junkie going to rehab seeking help but also hiding his drugs. He is completely willing to work with God when there but if not, he has drugs if completely necessary. Certainly, we see a common reoccurring theme within many experiences. Jump to God's Providence and make no reservations to stay at all (321). As such, take all your stuff and give it to the poor as “only when the sacrifice is ruthless and reckless will the higher safety really arrive” (321). We get an example of a youth child with the word of God telling them to detach; monastery life is not enough, goes into the desert, they return home with a minimal living. They wake up one morning with a penny for bread when God questions her faith in a penny. She then throws it away with faith alone in the Lord. Then feels immediate and complete bliss greater than, she argues, the rest of her life combined. Powerful object that penny, a minuscule value but once ditched a psychology threshold is passed. However, in contrast we see an example of a person with great spiritual excitement who renounces all and gives it away all the while his pasture is denouncing his actions as fanaticism.

Certainly, we also find democratic sentiment as such people generally regard all humans equal under God, something generally more common with Muslims than Christians. Thus, not mere individual humility but rather collective humanity in “refusing to enjoy what others do not share” (324). But, with all regards thus far such experiences are only influential to the experiencer; with an example such as an American cannot possibly understand the loyalty to the British king (325). And, if this is so, then how do we understand subtler religious sentiments present outside of experience? Certainly, a tough one. However, in such experiences all is solved and feels “transparently obvious” (325); “each emotion obeys a logic of its own and makes deductions which no other logic can draw” (325). With James arguing, piety and charity live in entirely different universes than lust or fear (325) and when realized, form a new center of energy. With many times holding on to personal possessions too difficult and mean in feeling to maintain within X center of energy. Now, James's plan; if we are outside such subjective experiences all we are left with is the observation and recording of others, a true radical empiricism.

--Seth Graves-Huffman

Questions on mysticism etc.

 From last Spring's MALA Experience course--

1. Have you had any experiences you'd describe as "mystical"? Or can you, like WJ, "speak of them only at second hand"? 379
2. Is there any point in talking about ineffable experiences? Can an inarticulate experience really be noetic, a source of knowledge? 380
3. What do you make of the "been here before" (deja vu) phenomenon? 383-4
4. WJ says "the consciousness produced by intoxicants" is both mystical and self-destructive. (387) Agree? Is the mystical state of mind generally untenable or unsustainable? What is your preferred "exciter of the Yes function"? (See below*)
5. Should others have accepted Dr. Arroway's experience as "authoritative"? (See below#)
6. Do you think the senses have evolved to put us in touch with the real world? Or do they somehow block or distract us from an "inner sense of reality"? How could you know that an insensate experience was not delusional? 392
7. Is it possible that experiences in which "thought flies from world to world" are truly revelatory? Or at least suggestive of actual possibilities? (See Olaf Stapledon's sci-fi classic Star Maker below** and Richard Powers' Bewilderment)
8. By what criterion would you judge an experience "the most real"? 397
9. Are our experiences always mediated by words and concepts, such that we can't be sure that our experience of (say) health is colored by our definition of health? 403 Is there a neat distinction between "knowledge given in sensations" and "that given by conceptual thought"? 405
10. Is it possible to experience and appreciate the oneness of self and universe without being in a religious or mystical state of consciousness? 419
11. What's potentially mystical about musical experience? 420-21
12. Do you agree with WJ about the extent of authority implicit in mystical states? 422

**

"experience beyond comprehension"

The narrator of this story has fantastical experiences, personally compelling but not authoritative for others. So... are these mystical experiences? Or just very imaginative? Either way, what if it happened to you? Would it open you to possible worlds previously unknown? What would Dr. Arroway say?

"Of all that I experienced on my travels, only a fraction was clearly intelligible to me even at the time; and then, as I shall tell, my native powers were aided by beings of superhuman development. Now that I am once more on my native planet, and this aid is no longer available, I cannot recapture even so much of the deeper insight as I formerly attained. And so my record, which tells of the most far-reaching of all human explorations, turns out to be after all no more reliable than the rigmarole of any mind unhinged by the impact of experience beyond its comprehension."

"Star Maker" by Olaf Stapledon: https://a.co/0k2ONJN

==

A psychedelic mystic: "Celebrate experience"

A Psychedelics Pioneer Takes the Ultimate Trip

"Life has been more beautiful, more wonderful than ever," says Dr. Roland Griffiths, who has stage 4 cancer.

...So you have this sense, near the end of your life, of waking up to life's real meaning. What's the most important thing for everyone else who's still asleep to know? I want everyone to appreciate the joy and wonder of every single moment of their lives. We should be astonished that we are here when we look around at the exquisite wonder and beauty of everything. I think everyone has a sense of that already. It's leaning into that more fully. There is a reason every day to celebrate that we're alive, that we have another day to explore whatever this gift is of being conscious, of being aware, of being aware that we are aware. That's the deep mystery that I keep talking about. That's to be celebrated! nyt

==

WJ's pseudo-mystical experience

Walpurgis Nacht

To Mrs. James.

St. Hubert's Inn, Keene Valley, July 9, 1898.

...I have had an eventful 24 hours, and my hands are so stiff after it that my fingers can hardly hold the pen. I left, as I informed you by post-card, the Lodge at seven, and five hours of walking brought us to the top of Marcy—I carrying 18 lbs. of weight in my pack. As usual, I met two Cambridge acquaintances on the mountain top—"Appalachians" from Beede's. At four, hearing an axe below, I went down (an hour's walk) to Panther Lodge Camp, and there found Charles and Pauline Goldmark, Waldo Adler and another schoolboy, and two Bryn Mawr girls—the girls all dressed in boys' breeches, and cutaneously desecrated in the extreme from seven of them having been camping without a male on Loon Lake to the north of this. My guide had to serve for the party, and quite unexpectedly to me the night turned out one of the most memorable of all my memorable experiences. I was in a wakeful mood before starting, having been awake since three, and I may have slept a little during this night; but I was not aware of sleeping at all. My companions, except Waldo Adler, were all motionless. The guide had got a magnificent provision of firewood, the sky swept itself clear of every trace of cloud or vapor, the wind entirely ceased, so that the fire-smoke rose straight up to heaven. The temperature was perfect either inside or outside the cabin, the moon rose and hung above the scene before midnight, leaving only a few of the larger stars visible, and I got into a state of spiritual alertness of the most vital description. The influences of Nature, the wholesomeness of the people round me, especially the good Pauline, the thought of you and the children, dear Harry on the wave, the problem of the Edinburgh lectures, all fermented within me till it became a regular Walpurgis Nacht. I spent a good deal of it in the woods, where the streaming moonlight lit up things in a magical checkered play, and it seemed as if the Gods of all the nature-mythologies were holding an indescribable meeting in my breast with the moral Gods of the inner life. The two kinds of Gods have nothing in common—the Edinburgh lectures made quite a hitch ahead. The intense significance of some sort, of the whole scene, if one could only tell the significance; the intense inhuman remoteness of its inner life, and yet the intense appeal of it; its everlasting freshness and its immemorial antiquity and decay; its utter Americanism, and every sort of patriotic suggestiveness, and you, and my relation to you part and parcel of it all, and beaten up with it, so that memory and sensation all whirled inexplicably together; it was indeed worth coming for, and worth repeating year by year, if repetition could only procure what in its nature I suppose must be all unplanned for and unexpected. It was one of the happiest lonesome nights of my existence, and I understand now what a poet is. He is a person who can feel the immense complexity of influences that I felt, and make some partial tracks in them for verbal statement. In point of fact, I can't find a single word for all that significance, and don't know what it was significant of, so there it remains, a mere boulder of impression. Doubtless in more ways than one, though, things in the Edinburgh lectures will be traceable to it.... Letters of William James, vol. 2

==

From Michael Pollan's How to Change Your Mind--

More "How to Change Your Mind"

 “I’m struck by the fact there was nothing supernatural about my heightened perceptions that afternoon, nothing that I needed an idea of magic or a divinity to explain. No, all it took was another perceptual slant on the same old reality, a lens or mode of consciousness that invented nothing but merely (merely!) italicized the prose of ordinary experience, disclosing the wonder that is always there in a garden or wood, hidden in plain sight—another form of consciousness “parted from [us],” as William James put it, “by the filmiest of screens.” Nature does in fact teem with subjectivities—call them spirits if you like—other than our own; it is only the human ego, with its imagined monopoly on subjectivity, that keeps us from recognizing them all, our kith and kin. In this sense, I guess Paul Stamets is right to think the mushrooms are bringing us messages from nature, or at least helping us to open up and read them.”

(continues)

Lyceum Friday

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Phil Oliver (@osopher)

MTSU philosophy lecturer to speak on ‘Freedom in Education’ at Nov. 17 public talk

• by NANCY DEGENNARO
 
• 13 NOVEMBER 2023
 
• TOP STORIES

The importance and limitations of attending to parental wishes in public schools will be the focus of the 2023 Applied Philosophy Lyceum at Middle Tennessee State University.

Dr. Eric Thomas Weber

Author Eric Thomas Weber, associate professor of educational policy studies and evaluation at the University of Kentucky, will give a free public lecture on “Freedom in Education: A Philosophical Critique of Current Conflicts in Educational Policy” at 5 p.m. Friday, Nov. 17, in Room 164 at the College of Education Building.

In the talk, Weber will defend the importance of students’ and teachers’ freedom to challenge the overreach of parental views that seek to silence the lived experiences of marginalized groups.

“In effect, I will argue that parents’ rights are indeed important, but must be understood to be limited,” said Weber, whose essay on the topic will appear in Transactions of the Charles S. Pierce Society American philosophy journal.

Weber’s lecture ispresented by the Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies in the MTSU College of Liberal Arts.

The topic for the lyceum was prompted by recent aggressive movements by a small minority of parents involving themselves in protests against decisions of professional educators regarding materials deemed appropriate for classrooms.

“That movement has been quite visible in Middle Tennessee lately, with parents attending school board meetings and creating hostility that sometimes has spilled even into the threat of violence,” explained Phil Oliver, associate professor of philosophy and religious studies at MTSU.

In July, Tennessee state law went into effect that puts book publishers, sellers and distributors at risk of prosecution for providing what is deemed “obscene materials” to public schools.

Dr. Phil Oliver

“A free society cannot endure when a vocal but ill-informed and anti-intellectual minority is allowed to suppress the best pedagogical practice and judgment of trained educators,” Oliver said.

Oliver said parents and guardians are naturally concerned about what their children are taught in schools. Some lament what they feel is a lack of control over curricula and what are thought to be forces or agendas they believe are not in kids’ best interests.

But there are issues with blanket decisions based on a small minority in opposition, Weber said.

“Because public schools are a shared endeavor, such that imposition on others must be taken into account,” Weber said. “And secondly, because students and teachers have interests and rights as well, morally and educationally, such that we must understand there to be a balance to strike.”

Following Weber’s talk, the floor will open for a Q&A session regarding the topic. There will also be a post-event reception.

The Applied Philosophy Lyceum, which was conceived with Aristotle’s Lyceum in mind, was created in 1992. The public lecture aims to stimulate private reflection and public reasoning. Over the years, topics have ranged from environmental ethics to theories of love and friendship.

The College of Education Building is located at 1756 MTSU Blvd. For off-campus visitors attending the event, a searchable campus parking map is at http://bit.ly/MTSUParkingMap.

For more information, contact the Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies at 615-898-2907.

— Nancy DeGennaro (Nancy.DeGennaro@mtsu.edu)

 

Happy Sagan Day

It's the birthday of the man that Smithsonian Magazine called "truly irreplaceable": that's astronomer Carl Sagan, born in Brooklyn (1934)...
https://open.substack.com/pub/thewritersalmanac/p/the-writers-almanac-from-thursday-0a1?r=35ogp&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post

Familiar conversions

"…how striking it is that when someone has a religious-conversion experience, it is almost always to the religion or one of the religions that are mainly believed in his or her community. Because there are so many other possibilities. For example, it's very rare in the West that someone has a religious-conversion experience in which the principal deity has the head of an elephant and is painted blue. That is quite rare. But in India there is a blue, elephant-headed god that has many devotees. And seeing depictions of this god there is not so rare. How is it that the apparition of elephant gods is restricted to Indians and doesn't happen except in places where there is a strong Indian tradition? How is that apparitions of the Virgin Mary are common in the West but rarely occur in places in the East where there isn't a strong Christian tradition? Why don't the details of the religious belief cross over the cultural barriers? It is hard to explain unless the details are entirely determined by the local culture and have nothing to do with something that is externally valid.

Put another way, any preexisting predisposition to religious belief can be powerfully influenced by the indigenous culture, wherever you happen to grow up. And especially if the children are exposed early to a particular set of doctrine and music and art and ritual, then it is as natural as breathing, which is why religions make such a large effort to attract the very young.

Or let's take another possibility. Suppose a new prophet arises who claims a revelation from God, and that revelation contravenes the revelations of all previous religions. How is the average person, someone not so fortunate as to have received this revelation personally, to decide whether this new revelation is valid or not? The only dependable way is through natural theology. You have to ask, "What is the evidence?" And it's insufficient to say, "Well, there is this extremely charismatic person who said that he had a conversion experience." Not enough. There are lots of charismatic people who have all sorts of mutually exclusive conversion experiences. They can't all be right. Some of them have to be wrong. Many of them have to be wrong. It's even possible that all of them are wrong. We cannot depend entirely on what people say. We have to look at what the evidence is."

— The Varieties of Scientific Experience: A Personal View of the Search for God by Carl Sagan, Ann Druyan