Abstract
Non-symbolic (non-perceptual, non-conceptual, “void”) experience is a hallmark of the mystic. How can we account for it? Jung's reductionistic theory of symbolic “all-contamination” is in some ways satisfying, but finally inadequate. Another theory—that the void is a state of “pure affectivity”–is inviting, but again inadequate: It overlooks the intuitive, or “knowing” aspect of mysticism. The mystical state has an affective and an intuitive moment, but the intuitive moment is, unlike ordinary forms of knowledge, wholly non-symbolic. Mystical “knowledge” suggests a new epistemological paradigm for human experience: All normal human experience involves a cyclical moving back and forth, many times every minute, between the symbolic percept or concept and the non-symbolic intuition or affect. In other words, persons experience the Void everytime they think: the Void is a mysterious canvas upon which every cognition is painted. One of the implications of this is the relativity of all religious conceptualizations: The Void is more ultimate. More important implications are those that impinge on most psychologists' working assumptions concerning human nature. A majority of psychologists hold a physicalist view of human nature, make little if any provision for free will, scoff at notions of survival of bodily death, and in general have a much lower esteem of religion than the population at large. If the thesis presented here is persuasive, those psychologists will perhaps be moved to make a reassessment.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
