Yea, it is. As an art - music - drug lover, I fully admit that despite my love for materialism and science, I love the netherspaces of the unexplained mental states and emotions that can be reached only through "mysticism". I like it - but I don't think it is a good guide for determining the nature of reality - except for mine maybe.
We often talk of the strangeness of the human mind "grasping" its own functioning. I think it may be possible and interesting - and I don't think it is difficult to note the Electro-chemical properties and estimate on paper the emotional state of a human. But like music on paper - it is impossible to all but the best musical prodigy to look at the sheet music and know what the song sounds like as a whole without playing the music.
I wouldn't sacrifice my irrational aspects for the world, but would like better reasoning skills to interpret all that does not fall into the "Abstract bucket" in my brain.
From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Tim Rhodes
Sent: Thursday, February 18, 1999 3:39 AM To: email@example.com Subject: Re: virus: Thinking clearly about faith
>The reason it is ignored is because it is not a feature of the scientific
>worldview. This worldview does not have a desire to explain what is beyond
>its scope. For the same reason the religion cant deal with the question
>is the sky Blue", Science cant answer many questions regarding complex,
>abstract or metaphorical issues.
But that doesn't seem to stop them from trying, does it Bill? Or at least to stop them from claiming that those who try to answer abstract metaphorical questions must be "just spouting more bullshitty mystical talk".