Speaking Personally, Can a Mystical Experience be Conclusive Evidence for the Existence of God?

EDIT: A MUCH better way of stating the question asked in this thread can be found in this other thread. In fact, I think this thread is likely to be quite confusing. If you are interested in this question, it is probably best to discuss it in the other thread. Besides, I hear they are serving tea and cookies in the other thread. At least that's what I hear. They sure are not serving tea and cookies in this thread!


Speaking strictly from a personal standpoint, can a mystical experience provide a person with logically and methodologically conclusive (or at least compelling) evidence for the existence* of god?

EDIT: For example, If I have a mystical experience that I interpret as an experience of god, then can and/or does that mystical experience provide me with a logically or methodologically conclusive reason to believe god exists? What about a logically or methodologically compelling reason, if not a conclusive reason?

SECOND EDIT: *and/or nature of god. My apologies for the edits. I am trying to refine the question based on some pretty insightful criticisms by @SalixIncendium and @ratiocinator.

......
Going by past experience, I am thrilled to say that I calculate the odds this thread will attract at least one intelligent, well-thought out post to be no less than one chance in eight! I know! I know! It's incredible how many thoughtful people there are in the world who are willing to genuinely think something through before responding, rather than dash off the first thing that comes into their minds. And what a joy they are!



PLEASE NOTE WELL: The question is not about whether one person's mystical experience provides grounds for another person to belief in the existence of god. It is about whether one person's mystical experience provides grounds for that person to believe in god.


______________
What is a "mystical experience" in this context? That's a good question! See this Wiki article to get you started on discovering the exciting and astonishing answer to that question. Remember: Buckle up before clicking through to the Wiki article because the thrills start immediately and are non-stop!

_____________
My own position on this issue is not wholly solidified yet, despite on and off mulling the issue over for the past 40 years (I try not to arrive at hasty and premature conclusions). In general, though, I lean towards they are most likely strong evidence for the existence of some kind of weirdness in the universe that we humans cannot conclusively say is "god". Of course, that's personal evidence and is of little or no relevance to anyone but the person who has had the experience.

I have had many very weird experiences throughout my life, but I am still looking for a natural explanation for them.

JJ50 said:

I have had many very weird experiences throughout my life, but I am still looking for a natural explanation for them.

Click to expand...

Why?

From anyone's personal perspective, anything can be personal evidence of something when one wants to believe in it enough for it to be real. Considering that one's personal evidence can only be evidence to the individual, and that others tend to believe the same thing for the sake of community and commonality over reason, it is not surprising that non-believers are not persuaded by a faith based notion that has zero credibility.

Phaedrus said:

From anyone's personal perspective, anything can be personal evidence of something when one wants to believe in it enough for it to be real. Considering that one's personal evidence can only be evidence to the individual, and that others tend to believe the same thing for the sake of community and commonality over reason, it is not surprising that non-believers are not persuaded by a faith based notion that has zero credibility.

Click to expand...

What on earth has the OP to do with what other people believe about someone's mystical experience?

Sunstone said:

What on earth has the OP to do with what other people believe about someone's mystical experience?

Click to expand...

I suppose then that the sociological and psychological perspective does not interest you, which in no way invalidates what I posted.

In case you missed my edit, @Sunstone
Steering a conversation strictly toward where you want it to go does not sit well with me.

Sunstone said:

Why?

Click to expand...

Because I think there is a natural explanation for everything even if science is yet to come up with it.

Phaedrus said:

I suppose then that the sociological and psychological perspective does not interest you, which in no way invalidates what I posted.

Click to expand...

What you posted happens to be true, but is wholly off topic and irrelevant in this thread, as you might yourself fathom should you actually read the OP.

I am afraid you cannot possibly have read the OP -- or at least you cannot possibly have understood it.

JJ50 said:

Because I think there is a natural explanation for everything even if science is yet to come up with it.

Click to expand...

I tend to agree with you, although I am fully aware that my views on the matter are a guess at best.

Sunstone said:

I tend to agree with you, although I am fully aware that my views on the matter are a guess at best.

Click to expand...

I am glad we agree on something.

One can often interpret data gathered from a mystical experience seven ways from Sunday, which is far from conclusive.

The experience would have to be something like this:

The Presence Within: Hey there! I'm God and not your dear departed Uncle Charlie.

Evidence refuting illusion: The 7-10-13 trifecta would be a good bet at Saturday's Kentucky Derby

Sunstone said:

Speaking strictly from a personal standpoint, can a mystical experience provide a person with logically and methodologically conclusive evidence for the existence of god?

......
Going by past experience, I am thrilled to say that I calculate the odds this thread will attract at least one intelligent, well-thought out post to be no less than one chance in eight! I know! I know! It's incredible how many thoughtful people there are in the world who are willing to genuinely think something through before responding, rather than dash off the first thing that comes into their minds. And what a joy they are!

By the way, if you choose to answer the question in the affirmative, then how do you account for the significant number of people who are non-theists, yet have mystical experiences, and afterwards remain non-theists? Beyond that, what are your grounds for asserting that a mystical experience can be personally conclusive evidence for the existence of god?​

On the other hand, if you choose to answer the question in the negative, then what are your reasons for answering it in the negative? Surely you are not going to propose that all mystical experiences are hallucinations, or at least, might be hallucinations, are you? I mean, that would be a really strange thing to say even by current American presidential standards, given that mystical experiences differ in 4-6 ways from hallucinations, according to those psychologists who study these things. So if you are not going to cop out with "they could be hallucinations" then on what grounds do you assert that mystical experiences cannot be conclusive evidence for god?​

PLEASE NOTE WELL: The question is not about whether one person's mystical experience provides grounds for another person to belief in the existence of god. It is about whether one person's mystical experience provides grounds for that person to believe in god.


______________
What is a "mystical experience" in this context? That's a good question! See this Wiki article to get you started on discovering the exciting and astonishing answer to that question. Remember: Buckle up before clicking through to the Wiki article because the thrills start immediately and are non-stop!

_____________
My own position on this issue is not wholly solidified yet, despite on and off mulling the issue over for the past 40 years (I try not to arrive at hasty and premature conclusions). In general, though, I lean towards they are most likely strong evidence for the existence of some kind of weirdness in the universe that we humans cannot conclusively say is "god". Of course, that's personal evidence and is of little or no relevance to anyone but the person who has had the experience.

Click to expand...

For me, veridical mystical or spiritual or.....natural, whatever term one wants to use, but, veridical experiences for me rule out halucinations. And i have had a few of those, they are rare, but they DO exist.

I think it can, but it is dependent on that person's life experience and the type of mystical experience.

I believe Alan Watts discusses this, concluding that the experience is molded into that person's understanding of life. If a person understands the world as created by God, the sense of wonder at the connectedness if creation will serve to connect them with God. If they are Buddhist, they may connect this with Nirvana. A non-theist will likely feel awestruck at the realization they are as part of the Universe as everything else.

Personally, I define "God" as related to my connectedness to everything else. The simple act of being becomes the most important thing ever when the experience hits me, and I feel my own being as filling the Universe. (Not the best description maybe, but it's not easy to describe. )

I imagine that since the mystical experience occurs through a particular pattern in the brain dealing with the boundaries of self, any interpretations of this become very independent on how the individual interprets reality. It could very well mean a personal proof of God. It once did that for me at one point. But as my philosophy changed, so did my interpretation.

I remember standing on a beach at sunset as a teenager and was struck by this sudden sense of connectedness and wonder. I had my journal and began furiously writing down impressions to capture it in poetry. In the middle of everything was "There is a god!"

But, more recently, I was stargazing and the particular strains of a song instantly propelled me into the sense that I was thrust into my body and experiencing pure being, as if I were looking at myself from a distance before (my most common experience that I term mystical). My interpretation was more of myself as a part of the conscience Universe observation itself. This has been my interpretation for many years, and I know it may change as well.

I've never had anything that night be construed as being mystical - perhaps God rejected me very early on.

However, I have had a few experiences which might be involved with such - the 'flow' experience (whilst rock-climbing, and where seemingly I could not have placed a hand or foot anywhere other than where it was placed, such that I seemed oblivious of what I was doing), and also a love-at-first-sight (LAFS) experience - where I seemed to dissolve and wanted to merge with the other person.

I am really poor at recognising and/or appreciating works of art all too often, and I suspect this (appreciating art) is much like LAFS, and perhaps also like having a mystical experience, such that we are predisposed in many cases to seek such. I was certainly aching for any loving relationship at the time and perhaps this is the case for those who have mystical experiences or even those who suddenly come across a piece of art that astounds them.

I'm up for the latter if that is possible (not gaining much apart from some music that has moved me) but the religious ones seem to elude me for some reason - perhaps because my rationality has provided an adequate defence? I suspect that our mind processes are at work to produce mystical experiences, just as they might be in those I have mentioned. And our minds are really adept at fooling us it seems - our senses being the vulnerable bits all too often.

Edit: I'm not sure experiencing a sunrise on a flat calm sea (on a yacht) counts as a mystical experience but it seemed like such to me.

I don't think anything can provide logical or conclusive evidence of God. Mystic events are outside of logic, that's partly why they're termed mystical. (I do get a kick out of those who attempt to define it logically, as in the Wiki you linked. All that talking about it takes the fun out of it.) Let's take beckoning as an example. A person just feels really called to a place, to a God, to an event. What's logical about that, unless there's some sort of spiritual pheromones yet to be discovered?

As for the 'conclusive' bit, I see conclusive as being at 100%. Mystical experiences can increase your belief in God, make it more likely to you that a God exists, and of course a series of such events would make it even more likely. But always, in the back of your mind, there's going to be that lingering doubt that it was all imagination, some trick, some delusion. The only exception to that might be mystic masters who've had direct union with God type experiences spoken of rarely as it too is outside of logic, outside of word. (nirvikalpa samadhi in Sanskrit)

Sunstone said:

Speaking strictly from a personal standpoint, can a mystical experience provide a person with logically and methodologically conclusive evidence for the existence of god?

......
Going by past experience, I am thrilled to say that I calculate the odds this thread will attract at least one intelligent, well-thought out post to be no less than one chance in eight! I know! I know! It's incredible how many thoughtful people there are in the world who are willing to genuinely think something through before responding, rather than dash off the first thing that comes into their minds. And what a joy they are!

By the way, if you choose to answer the question in the affirmative, then how do you account for the significant number of people who are non-theists, yet have mystical experiences, and afterwards remain non-theists? Beyond that, what are your grounds for asserting that a mystical experience can be personally conclusive evidence for the existence of god?​

On the other hand, if you choose to answer the question in the negative, then what are your reasons for answering it in the negative? Surely you are not going to propose that all mystical experiences are hallucinations, or at least, might be hallucinations, are you? I mean, that would be a really strange thing to say even by current American presidential standards, given that mystical experiences differ in 4-6 ways from hallucinations, according to those psychologists who study these things. So if you are not going to cop out with "they could be hallucinations" then on what grounds do you assert that mystical experiences cannot be conclusive evidence for god?​

PLEASE NOTE WELL: The question is not about whether one person's mystical experience provides grounds for another person to belief in the existence of god. It is about whether one person's mystical experience provides grounds for that person to believe in god.


______________
What is a "mystical experience" in this context? That's a good question! See this Wiki article to get you started on discovering the exciting and astonishing answer to that question. Remember: Buckle up before clicking through to the Wiki article because the thrills start immediately and are non-stop!

_____________
My own position on this issue is not wholly solidified yet, despite on and off mulling the issue over for the past 40 years (I try not to arrive at hasty and premature conclusions). In general, though, I lean towards they are most likely strong evidence for the existence of some kind of weirdness in the universe that we humans cannot conclusively say is "god". Of course, that's personal evidence and is of little or no relevance to anyone but the person who has had the experience.

Click to expand...

While I love to discuss mystical experiences, I, unfortunately, cannot speak intelligently about anyone’s experiences but my own, save accounts I’ve read about others’ mystical experiences.

I've read accounts of others who claimed to have a mystical experience that attest to experiencing god, but I, personally, have found no logical or methodological conclusive evidence of what is generally accepted as god in my experiences. Just me.

Back in the 1960's-70's eastern and western mysticism were popular. Many of the natural drugs that young people took were originally used by mystics, priests and witch doctors, from around the world, to help them hear and see the spirits; herbs and mushrooms. Having mystical experiences was popular back in the day, mostly induced by drugs. Many of the young people were quite comfortable and functional in alternate realities; turn on and tune in.

Developing higher human potential was also popular back then, with these higher human abilities assumed to be connected to our spiritual and mystical sides. Personally, I did not do the hallucinogenic drugs. I was usually a baby sitter for the mystical travelers. However, I did go along with the philosophy of having mystical experiences and developing higher human potential. It was revolutionary brain research in the making with tons of data everywhere.

Years later, after the times had changed and the fad ended for most, I remained true to the quest, via occult, witch crafts, and mysticism. I learned how to induced mystical experiences using meditation, yoga, visualization and breathing exercises. Some of these experiences got scary, which ultimately caused me to quit my experiments.

The one experience that made me quit was the day I was finally able to leave my body; astral projection. It was awesome, but scary since I was not sure if I would be able to get back into my body. I never thought I would get this far, and I had no plan for the reversal. I aborted that test, and quit all the mystical exercises. Instead I looked for a science explanation, for my experiences, so I had a way to be objective to what I had experienced.

Mystical experiences can be unsettling, if you work under the assumption the affects are happening outside yourself, via a spirit world. If spiritual world is outside of you, you have no control over these things, anymore you can control physical reality. Each obeys its own laws apart from you. On the other hand, if these experience were generated by the brain, and therefore start from within and then project, external reality would offer a mooring, and a sense of control; control test for the experiment.

When one uses a hallucinogenic drug, the experience can be scary, but you know this is caused by a drug interaction with the brain, which is something inside of you. This understanding helps one detach the vision from physical reality and associated with something else. But if this same experience happens and there is no drug involved, it not clear where it comes from. I needed to find an objective way to explain these things so I had better mooring so I could remain objective. I wanted to be the scientist and the experiment.

Over decades of private research, I have concluded that tapping into the operating system of the human brain is the final frontier of science. I also realized that the world's religions are analogous to the information technology sciences of the natural brain. They offer maps into the firmware. God is connected to and by this higher human potential of the brain.

Sunstone said:

On the other hand, if you choose to answer the question in the negative, then what are your reasons for answering it in the negative? Surely you are not going to propose that all mystical experiences are hallucinations, or at least, might be hallucinations, are you? I mean, that would be a really strange thing to say even by current American presidential standards, given that mystical experiences differ in 4-6 ways from hallucinations, according to those psychologists who study these things. So if you are not going to cop out with "they could be hallucinations" then on what grounds do you assert that mystical experiences cannot be conclusive evidence for god?

Click to expand...

From the wiki article you linked:

To conclude something about objective reality (such as a god exists outside of human ideas), one needs objective evidence. A subjective experience isn't objective evidence, let alone conclusive evidence.

ratiocinator said:

From the wiki article you linked:

The term "mystical experience" has become synonymous with the terms "religious experience", spiritual experience and sacred experience. A "religious experience" is a subjective experience which is interpreted within a religious framework. [my emphasis]
​

To conclude something about objective reality (such as a god exists outside of human ideas), one needs objective evidence. A subjective experience isn't objective evidence, let alone conclusive evidence.

Click to expand...

Really? Are you sure you have thought through what "objective evidence" actually is? It's not hard to see that all so called "objective" evidence is actually inter-subjectively verifiable evidence. Nice try, but humans are not gods and cannot escape their own subjectivity.