You are playing with the semantics of sober/intoxicated. Intoxicated (in this context) refers to exogenous modulators of neurochemistry, which activate distinct signalling pathways compared to endogenous ligands:
This accounts for the “alien” character of the psychedelic experience, which is not an attribute normally used for sober mystical experiences.
> Importantly, the mysticism scale is not a “drug induced mysticism scale.”
Yes, hence my argument: while this scale identifies similarities between sober/intoxicated experiences, it doesn’t give an exhaustive description and overlooks that there might be just as many differences.
The same argument goes for the perennialist view of mysticism. Different doctrines might share the end goal, but the chosen path can be experienced very differently. I guess my point is to not stipulate one path as representative of all paths which arrive at the same destination. The end goal in fact lays outside doctrine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_selectivity#Example...
This accounts for the “alien” character of the psychedelic experience, which is not an attribute normally used for sober mystical experiences.
> Importantly, the mysticism scale is not a “drug induced mysticism scale.”
Yes, hence my argument: while this scale identifies similarities between sober/intoxicated experiences, it doesn’t give an exhaustive description and overlooks that there might be just as many differences.
The same argument goes for the perennialist view of mysticism. Different doctrines might share the end goal, but the chosen path can be experienced very differently. I guess my point is to not stipulate one path as representative of all paths which arrive at the same destination. The end goal in fact lays outside doctrine.