Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Is William James’s Analysis of Mystic Experience Phenomenological or Philosophical?

Year 2021, Issue: 43, 213 - 236, 20.03.2021
https://doi.org/10.37697/eskiyeni.857680

Abstract

The concept of mystical experience is defined today as an experience of uniting with the Ultimate Reality, which is named as Absolute, God and Nothingness, in a pure and direct way. The aforementioned definition is relatively new since this concept had been used by Christian saints to mean “attaining religious truths” until about the 19th century. In the 19th century, mystical experiences were associated with psychosomatic illnesses and that mystics were considered as being part of deviant religious movements. By the 20th century, however, new academic debates emerged claiming that mystical experience was a universal phenomenon and that it could be understood independent of religion as a separate a phenomenon. Undoubtedly, William James (1842-1910) was the leading philosopher who uniquely contributed to these debates claiming that mystical experi-ence, which had been accepted as a state of illness, was a valuable element of human experience. In an age where materialistic naturalism was rising and the understanding that science and religion contradict one another was prevalent, James asserted that the idea of an individual religion against materialism, which depends on mystical experience and does not conflict with the idea of nature in his well-known work, The Varieties of Reli-gious Experience: A Study in Human Nature. This claim of James is rooted in the objec-tive/phenomenological analysis of mystic experience.
In his work, James discusses various narrations of mystic experience as a phenomenon. James’s examination of firsthand mystical experiences includes two stages. Firstly, he determines four basic characteristics of mystical experience and creates a typology based on these common characteristics. These four characteristics of the mystical state of consciousness are ineffability, noetic quality, transiency, and passivity. James considers mystical experience with these characteristics as being the mystical consciousness of the Unseen Order. He comes to three conclusions regarding the experience as the mystic consciousness of Unseen Order: 1. Experience is real for the individual who experiences it. 2. It does not have an effect on the one who does not experience it. 3. These experi-ences are the explicit proof for the existence of the supernatural. James’s work has been considered significant for the reasons that it puts experience as the proof for the super-natural and makes the experience as one of the subjects of philosophy. With a holistic approach to James’ understanding, it becomes apparent that mystic experience has a special role in his philosophy. The current study focuses on James’ mystical experience analysis.
The aim of this study is to examine how James’ explanations of mystical experience relate to his philosophy. The main claim of this paper is that James does not conduct an objective investigation based on phenomena as indicated in his research of mystical experience, but instead offers a philosophical explanation of mystical experience in the context of his philosophical system. Fort this purpose, the study consists of three parts together with an introduction. In the first part, James’s journey of thought until he wrote The Varieties of Religious Experience is discussed in relation to his studies of consciousness, his understanding of radical empiricism and pragmatism, and his orientation to religious studies. In the second part, his thoughts on mystical experience and his conclusions are discussed using his methods. And finally, in the last part, it is explained how James’s thoughts are the key determinants in determining the essential characteristics of mysti-cal experience, in defining it as “the experience of consciousness”, in positioning it as the source of religious experience, and in interpreting the consequences of experience. Thus, this study shows that his interpretation of mystical experience, -although it is important as an effort to understand the phenomenon-, is a reflection of James’ philosophy of religion, rather than being a theory based on the inner dynamics of the phenomenon. While determining the features of experience and in his conclusions, James puts his philosophical system at the centre rather than the inner dynamics of phenomena. In the present study, it is also demonstrated that James uses experience with a specific mean-ing and reference and in this way of use, experience has no relation with God, the Abso-lute or spirit and thus experience has no intellectual quality and religion that depends on this ground has a thoroughly psychological and individual character.

References

  • Bouyer, Louis. “Mysticism: An Essay on the History of the Word”. Understanding Mysticism. ed. Richard Woods. London: The Athlone Press, 1981.
  • Wikisource, en.wikisource. “The Hidden Self”. Erişim 10 Ocak 2021. https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/ The_Hidden_Self
  • Fergusson, David - Snow, Katherine. “What Provides a Better Explanation for the Origin of the Uni-verse: Science or Religion”. Philosophy, Science and Religion for Everyone. ed. Mark Harris, vd. London: Routledge, 2017.
  • Gellman, Jerome, “Mysticism”. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2019 Edition). ed. Edward N. Zalta. Erişim 8 Ocak 2021. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2019/entries/mysticism/
  • Haydon, Eustace. “The significance of Mystic’s Experience”. The Journal of Religion 2/2 (Mar. 1922), 179-189.
  • Hollinger, David A. ““Damned for God’s Glory” William James and the Scientific Vindication of Pro-testant Culture”. William James, and a Science of Religions: Reexperiencing The Varieties of Religi-ous Experience. ed. Wayne Proudfoot. New York: Columbia University Press, 2004.
  • İkbal, Muhammed. İslâm’da Dini Düşüncenin Yeniden İnşâsı. çev. Rahim Acar. İstanbul: Timaş Yayınları, 2013.
  • James, William. “A Suggestion About Mysticism”. The Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods 7/4 (Feb. 1910), 85-97. https://doi.org/10.2307/2011271
  • James, William. Dinsel Deneyimin Çeşitleri: İnsan Doğası Üzerine Bir İnceleme. çev. İsmail Hakkı Yılmaz. İstanbul: Pinhan Yay., 2017.
  • James, William. “Great Men, Great Thoughts, and the Environment”. Philosophy After Darwin: Classic and Contemporary Readings. ed. Michael Ruse. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009.
  • James, William. “Is Life Worth Living”. The Will to Believe: And Other Essay in Popular Philosophy. Camb-ridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
  • James, William. “Philosophical Conceptions and Practical Results”. University Chronicle 1/4 (1898), 287-309.
  • James, William. “Pluralistik Universe”. William James Writings 1902 1910. ed. Bruce Kuklic. New York: Literary Classics of the United, 1987.
  • James, William. “The Knowing of Things Together”. The Psychological Review 2/2 (1985), 105-24. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0073221
  • James, William. “What is an Emotion?”. Mind 9/34 (1884), 188-205. https://doi.org/10.1093/ mind/os-IX.34.188
  • James, William. “What Psychical Research Has Accomplished”. Will To Believe: And Other Essay in Popular Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1177/095715 4X12450138
  • James, William. Pragmatizm: Bazı Eski Düşünme Tarzları İçin Yeni Bir Ad. çev. Ferit Burak Aydar. İstan-bul: İş Bankası Yayınları, 2011.
  • James, William. Psychology, Briefer Course. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1984.
  • James, William. The Principles of Psychology. 1.Cilt. Harvard: Harvard University Press, 2007.
  • James, William. The Varieties of Religious Experience: A Study in Human Nature. New York: Penguin Books, 1985.
  • Katz, Steven T. “The ‘Conservative’ Character of Mystical Experience”. Mysticism and Religious Traditi-ons. ed. Steven T. Katz. 3-60. New York: Oxford University Press, 1983.
  • Katz, Steven T. “Language, Epistemology and Mysticism”. Mysticism and Philosophical Analysis. ed. Steven T. Katz. 22-74. Oxford University Press, New York, 1978.
  • Kingsland, William. An Anthology Mysticism and Mystical Philosophy. London: Methuen and Co. 1927.
  • Lamberth, David C. William James and the Metaphysics of Experience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
  • Levy-Bruhl, Lucien. İlkel Dinlerde Mistik Deneyim ve Simgeler. çev. Oğuz Adanır. İstanbul: Doğu Batı Yay., 2006.
  • Meierdiercks M. L. L.-Snarey J.R. “James, William and the Phenomenology of Religious Experience”. Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion. ed. Leeming D. (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2019). Eri-şim 5 Ocak 2021. https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007%2F978-3-030-24348-7_200207
  • O’Hear, Anthony. Experience, Explanation and Faith: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion. Londra: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1984. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203532638
  • Richardson, Robert D. William James in the Maelstrom of American Modernism: A Biography. Boston: Kahle/Austin Foundation, 2006.
  • Russell, Bertnard. Din ile Bilim. çev. Akşit Göktürk. İstanbul: Elif Yayınları, 1963.
  • Schmidt, Leigh Eric. “The Making of Modern “Mysticism”. Journal of the American Academy of Religion 71/2 (June 2003), 273–302. https://doi.org/10.1093/jaar/71.2.273
  • Sinanoğlu, Suat. “μύω” Maddesi. Yunanca - Türkçe Sözlük. Ankara: Anakara Üniversitesi Dil ve Tarih-Coğrafya Fakültesi, 1953.
  • Stace, Walter T. Mistisizm ve Felsefe. çev. Abdüllatif Tüzer. İstanbul: İnsan Yayınları, 2004.
  • Taves, Ann. “The Fragmentation of Consciousness and The Varieties of Religious Experience: William James’s Contribution to a Theory of Religion”. William James, and a Science of Religions Reexpe-riencing The Varieties of Religious Experience. ed. Wayne Proudfoot. 48-72. New York: Columbia University Press, 2004. https://doi.org/10.7312/prou13204
  • Taylor, Eugene. William James on Consciousness Beyond the Margin. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996.
  • Türer, Celal. “William James’ten Muhammed İkbal’e”. Felsefe Dünyası 29/1 (1999), 47-67.
  • Türer, Celal. “Pragmatizmin Doğruluk Evi”. Bilimname 17/2 (2009), 165-185.
  • Türer, Celal. William James’in Ahlak Anlayışı. İstanbul: Elis Yayınları, 2005.

William James’in Mistik Tecrübe Tahlili Fenomenolojik mi Yoksa Felsefi midir?

Year 2021, Issue: 43, 213 - 236, 20.03.2021
https://doi.org/10.37697/eskiyeni.857680

Abstract

Mistik tecrübe kavramı bugün Mutlak, Tanrı, Hiçlik, Boşluk gibi farklı biçimlerde isimlen-dirilen Nihai Gerçeklik ile saf, dolaysız bir birleşme tecrübesi olarak tanımlanmaktadır. Bu tanımlama görece yenidir, zira kavram, yaklaşık 19. yüzyıla kadar Hristiyan azizleri tara-fından “dini hakikatlere ulaşma” anlamında kullanılmaktadır. 19. yüzyılda mistik tecrübe psikosomatik hastalıklarla ilişkilendirilmis ve mistikler, sapkın dini hareketlerin bir par-çası olarak görülmüştür. Ancak 20 yüzyıla gelindiğinde, mistik tecrübenin evrensel bir fenomen olduğunu ve bir fenomen olması bakımından dinden bağımsız olarak ele alınıp anlaşılabileceğini savunan çalışmalar ortaya çıkmıştır. Şüphesiz William James (1842-1910), hastalık hali olarak kabul edilen mistik tecrübenin aslında insanlık tecrübesinin değerli bir unsuru olduğunu iddia ederek bu tartışmalara önemli bir katkı sağlayan öncü bir filozoftur. Materyalist doğa anlayışının hâkim olduğu ve dinin bilimle çelişiği kabul edildiği bir dönemde James, en bilinen eserlerinden biri olan The Varieties of Religious Expe-rience: A Study in Human Nature (Dinsel Deneyimin Çeşitleri: İnsan Doğası Üzerine Bir İnceleme) İnsanlık kitabında, doğalcılıkla çelişmeyen mistik tecrübeye dayalı bireysel bir din fikrini temellendirir. Bu temellendirme mistik tecrübenin nesnel/fenomenolojik tahliline daya-nır.
James, Dinsel Deneyimin Çeşitleri’nde çeşitli mistik tecrübe anlatılarını bir fenomen olarak ele alıp, inceler. James'in birinci elden mistik tecrübeler üzerinden yaptığı bu inceleme iki aşama içerir: Önce mistik tecrübenin dört ortak niteliğini belirleyerek bu ortak nitelikler üzerinden bir tipoloji oluşturur. Buna göre mistik bilinç durumunun dört niteliği, ifade edilemezlik, anlamsal nitelik, kısa süreli olma ve pasifliktir. James, bu dört özelliğiyle mistik tecrübeyi Görünmeyen Düzen’in mistik bilinci olarak görür. Ardından James Gö-rünmeyen Düzen’in mistik bilinci olan tecrübeyle ilgili üç sonuca varır: 1. Tecrübe onu deneyimleyen için gerçektir. 2. Deneyimlemeyen üzerinde bir yetkisi yoktur. 3. Bu tecrü-beler doğaüstünün varlığının açık kanıtlarıdır. James’in çalışması mistik tecrübenin felse-fenin konuları arasına girmesi ve tecrübeyi doğaüstünün kanıtı olarak göstermesi bakı-mından oldukça önemli görülmüştür. Bununla birlikte, James’in düşüncelerine bütünlüklü bir şekilde bakıldığında, onun felsefesinde mistik tecrübenin özel bir rolünün olduğu orta-ya çıkar. Bu bağlamda bu çalışmada, James’in mistik tecrübe tahlili konu edinilecektir.
Çalışmanın amacı James’in mistik tecrübeye ilişkin açıklamalarının onun felsefesiyle nasıl ilişkilendiğini irdelemektir. Bu itibarla makalenin ana iddiası, James’in mistik tecrübe araştırmasında işaret ettiği gibi fenomene dayalı nesnel bir soruşturma yürütmediği bunun yerine kendi felsefi dizgesi bağlamında mistik tecrübenin felsefi bir açıklamasını sunduğudur. Bu amaçla makale girişle birlikte üç kısımdan oluşmaktadır. İlk kısımda, James’in Dinsel Deneyimin Çeşitleri’ni yazana kadar geçirdiği düşünce serüveni, bilinç çalış-maları, radikal ampirizmi geliştirmesi, pragmatizmi benimsemesi ve din çalışmalarına yönelmesi üzerinden ele alınacaktır. İkinci kısımda, mistik tecrübeye ilişkin düşüncelerine ve ulaştığı sonuçlara mümkün olduğunca James’in takip ettiği yöntemle yer verilecektir. Son kısımda ise, mistik tecrübenin asli özelliklerinin belirlenmesinde, “bilinç tecrübesi” olarak tanımlanmasında, dini tecrübenin kaynağı olarak konumlandırılmasında ve söz konusu tecrübenin sonuçlarının yorumlanmasında James’in kendi düşüncelerinin nasıl belirleyici olduğu gösterilecektir. Böylece mistik tecrübenin söz konusu yorumunun, her ne kadar fenomenin anlaşılma çabası olması bakımından önemli olsa da, fenomenin kendi iç dinamiklerini kuşatan bir teori olmak yerine aslında James’in kendi din felsefe-sinin bir yorumu olduğu anlaşılacaktır. Sonuç olarak, bu çalışmayla James’in mistik tecrü-beyi özel bir anlam ve referansta kullandığı, bu kullanımda tecrübenin Tanrı’yla, Mut-lak’la ya da ruhla ilgili olmadığı ve dolayısıyla tecrübenin nesnel, entelektüel bir nitelik barındırmadığı, tecrübeye dayalı dinin de bütünüyle psikolojik ve bireysel karakterli oldu-ğu açığa çıkacaktır.

References

  • Bouyer, Louis. “Mysticism: An Essay on the History of the Word”. Understanding Mysticism. ed. Richard Woods. London: The Athlone Press, 1981.
  • Wikisource, en.wikisource. “The Hidden Self”. Erişim 10 Ocak 2021. https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/ The_Hidden_Self
  • Fergusson, David - Snow, Katherine. “What Provides a Better Explanation for the Origin of the Uni-verse: Science or Religion”. Philosophy, Science and Religion for Everyone. ed. Mark Harris, vd. London: Routledge, 2017.
  • Gellman, Jerome, “Mysticism”. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2019 Edition). ed. Edward N. Zalta. Erişim 8 Ocak 2021. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2019/entries/mysticism/
  • Haydon, Eustace. “The significance of Mystic’s Experience”. The Journal of Religion 2/2 (Mar. 1922), 179-189.
  • Hollinger, David A. ““Damned for God’s Glory” William James and the Scientific Vindication of Pro-testant Culture”. William James, and a Science of Religions: Reexperiencing The Varieties of Religi-ous Experience. ed. Wayne Proudfoot. New York: Columbia University Press, 2004.
  • İkbal, Muhammed. İslâm’da Dini Düşüncenin Yeniden İnşâsı. çev. Rahim Acar. İstanbul: Timaş Yayınları, 2013.
  • James, William. “A Suggestion About Mysticism”. The Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods 7/4 (Feb. 1910), 85-97. https://doi.org/10.2307/2011271
  • James, William. Dinsel Deneyimin Çeşitleri: İnsan Doğası Üzerine Bir İnceleme. çev. İsmail Hakkı Yılmaz. İstanbul: Pinhan Yay., 2017.
  • James, William. “Great Men, Great Thoughts, and the Environment”. Philosophy After Darwin: Classic and Contemporary Readings. ed. Michael Ruse. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009.
  • James, William. “Is Life Worth Living”. The Will to Believe: And Other Essay in Popular Philosophy. Camb-ridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
  • James, William. “Philosophical Conceptions and Practical Results”. University Chronicle 1/4 (1898), 287-309.
  • James, William. “Pluralistik Universe”. William James Writings 1902 1910. ed. Bruce Kuklic. New York: Literary Classics of the United, 1987.
  • James, William. “The Knowing of Things Together”. The Psychological Review 2/2 (1985), 105-24. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0073221
  • James, William. “What is an Emotion?”. Mind 9/34 (1884), 188-205. https://doi.org/10.1093/ mind/os-IX.34.188
  • James, William. “What Psychical Research Has Accomplished”. Will To Believe: And Other Essay in Popular Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1177/095715 4X12450138
  • James, William. Pragmatizm: Bazı Eski Düşünme Tarzları İçin Yeni Bir Ad. çev. Ferit Burak Aydar. İstan-bul: İş Bankası Yayınları, 2011.
  • James, William. Psychology, Briefer Course. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1984.
  • James, William. The Principles of Psychology. 1.Cilt. Harvard: Harvard University Press, 2007.
  • James, William. The Varieties of Religious Experience: A Study in Human Nature. New York: Penguin Books, 1985.
  • Katz, Steven T. “The ‘Conservative’ Character of Mystical Experience”. Mysticism and Religious Traditi-ons. ed. Steven T. Katz. 3-60. New York: Oxford University Press, 1983.
  • Katz, Steven T. “Language, Epistemology and Mysticism”. Mysticism and Philosophical Analysis. ed. Steven T. Katz. 22-74. Oxford University Press, New York, 1978.
  • Kingsland, William. An Anthology Mysticism and Mystical Philosophy. London: Methuen and Co. 1927.
  • Lamberth, David C. William James and the Metaphysics of Experience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
  • Levy-Bruhl, Lucien. İlkel Dinlerde Mistik Deneyim ve Simgeler. çev. Oğuz Adanır. İstanbul: Doğu Batı Yay., 2006.
  • Meierdiercks M. L. L.-Snarey J.R. “James, William and the Phenomenology of Religious Experience”. Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion. ed. Leeming D. (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2019). Eri-şim 5 Ocak 2021. https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007%2F978-3-030-24348-7_200207
  • O’Hear, Anthony. Experience, Explanation and Faith: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion. Londra: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1984. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203532638
  • Richardson, Robert D. William James in the Maelstrom of American Modernism: A Biography. Boston: Kahle/Austin Foundation, 2006.
  • Russell, Bertnard. Din ile Bilim. çev. Akşit Göktürk. İstanbul: Elif Yayınları, 1963.
  • Schmidt, Leigh Eric. “The Making of Modern “Mysticism”. Journal of the American Academy of Religion 71/2 (June 2003), 273–302. https://doi.org/10.1093/jaar/71.2.273
  • Sinanoğlu, Suat. “μύω” Maddesi. Yunanca - Türkçe Sözlük. Ankara: Anakara Üniversitesi Dil ve Tarih-Coğrafya Fakültesi, 1953.
  • Stace, Walter T. Mistisizm ve Felsefe. çev. Abdüllatif Tüzer. İstanbul: İnsan Yayınları, 2004.
  • Taves, Ann. “The Fragmentation of Consciousness and The Varieties of Religious Experience: William James’s Contribution to a Theory of Religion”. William James, and a Science of Religions Reexpe-riencing The Varieties of Religious Experience. ed. Wayne Proudfoot. 48-72. New York: Columbia University Press, 2004. https://doi.org/10.7312/prou13204
  • Taylor, Eugene. William James on Consciousness Beyond the Margin. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996.
  • Türer, Celal. “William James’ten Muhammed İkbal’e”. Felsefe Dünyası 29/1 (1999), 47-67.
  • Türer, Celal. “Pragmatizmin Doğruluk Evi”. Bilimname 17/2 (2009), 165-185.
  • Türer, Celal. William James’in Ahlak Anlayışı. İstanbul: Elis Yayınları, 2005.
There are 37 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Religious Studies
Journal Section Research
Authors

Betül Akdemir-süleyman 0000-0002-2196-4744

Publication Date March 20, 2021
Submission Date January 10, 2021
Published in Issue Year 2021 Issue: 43

Cite

ISNAD Akdemir-süleyman, Betül. “William James’in Mistik Tecrübe Tahlili Fenomenolojik Mi Yoksa Felsefi Midir?”. Eskiyeni 43 (March 2021), 213-236. https://doi.org/10.37697/eskiyeni.857680.