A Platonic delusion: The identification of psychosis and mysticism
This paper discusses the frequently-made claim that psychosis and mysticism are identifiable. Noting the failure of attempts by others to define psychosis and mysticism, I present what I call the symptomatological case for identifying them, hoping in this way to give an idea of their essential featu...
| 主要作者: | |
|---|---|
| 格式: | 電子 Article |
| 語言: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | 載入...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| 出版: |
Taylor & Francis
2000
|
| In: |
Mental health, religion & culture
Year: 2000, 卷: 3, 發布: 2, Pages: 157-172 |
| 在線閱讀: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| 總結: | This paper discusses the frequently-made claim that psychosis and mysticism are identifiable. Noting the failure of attempts by others to define psychosis and mysticism, I present what I call the symptomatological case for identifying them, hoping in this way to give an idea of their essential features. More general observations about the theoretical nature of the relationship between mental health and religion are made which might indicate an identification of psychosis and mysticism. It is then claimed that the idea of the identification often derives, though at times unconsciously, from an outmoded Platonic model. A short sketch of the intellectual history of the identification is presented. Finally, a more plausible basis for comparing psychosis and mysticism is offered, based on similar sociological origins or individual psychodynamic factors, before concluding that a fundamental difference in the conceptual status of psychosis as an illness and mysticism as a valued state of consciousness a priori precludes their identification. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1469-9737 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Mental health, religion & culture
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1080/713685600 |