otherstar
Registered User
If your experiences of science or mathematics are any less moving than your experiences in an ecstatic celebration at church, then I am saddened at how you have experienced science and mathematics. And vice versa.
To experience wonder in an intellectual exercise, or to experience joy in worship is NOT the same thing as having a genuine mystical experience. True mystical experiences are quite rare and come after undergoing purification, illumination, and finally unification. In my lifetime, I've never met a person I'd consider a genuine mystic...though I can think of a few who most likely were genuine mystics: Pope St. John Paull II, and the Dalai Lama are on the short list for me.
Of course our definitions of mystical differ. Where's the fun in disagreeing. I even know people who define it as the stuff that does not work. I prefer a usage that is useful. And more importantly that is the way it's used by practicing mystics.
Do we really get to choose how to define words, or is truth one or many?
I have encountered plenty of practicing mystics who nod when they read about Newton's numerology and how it can act as strength training for insight. Then they get fidgety when I apply the principle to mathematics. Math is one of the highest forms of mysticism in that view but a lot of people get uncomfortable when they get too close to it.
And here you are with the opposite. You used the word imagination not noticing the act of creating new knowledge. You got fidgety just like a practicing mystic shown a calculus book.
Like I said above, I don't think there are that many genuine mystics in the world and those who consider themselves to be mystics are probably not really mystics because the real mystics I mentioned would be the last person to refer to themselves as a mystic.