I just began his book on Mysticism yesterday. And was happy to discover what I thought would be a lecture. Instead he's reading from the book. Okay. I pass for now. I was hoping for something more relaxed and informal.
The missional nature of Critchley's quest is marked by crisis. "The poverty of contemporary experience", etc. I don't believe this is true. Those who lack a sense of wonder, a childlike sense of wonder if you will, are showing the poverty of their own minds. Because there is no sortable of things in which to find wonder. For those who have lost this, mysticism will not help them in the end. Blaming "modernity" or "contemporary times" is just a Romantic move to shift the blame for one's own poverty of mind -one's own lack of curiosity and wonder- onto the world.
I don't think you can judge someone for not always experiencing wonder. There's a lot of states of the human mind, not all of them wonder. Also, I know a few of Critchleys books, and the last thing I'd call them is a product of a "poverty of mind."
@@jonwinsor9233 I’ve read Critchley too. I respect him as a scholar. Poverty of mind was a poor term for lack of wonder. But often we find these complaints about lack of wonder is thought of others not oneself. Blaming ‘modernity’ or the times is a dodge. No one is perfect and despair happens, but when scholars spin it into a system of belief to justify their own inner state or the presumed state of others they shouldn’t get a pass for this.
I just began his book on Mysticism yesterday. And was happy to discover what I thought would be a lecture. Instead he's reading from the book. Okay. I pass for now. I was hoping for something more relaxed and informal.
The missional nature of Critchley's quest is marked by crisis. "The poverty of contemporary experience", etc. I don't believe this is true. Those who lack a sense of wonder, a childlike sense of wonder if you will, are showing the poverty of their own minds. Because there is no sortable of things in which to find wonder. For those who have lost this, mysticism will not help them in the end. Blaming "modernity" or "contemporary times" is just a Romantic move to shift the blame for one's own poverty of mind -one's own lack of curiosity and wonder- onto the world.
I don't think you can judge someone for not always experiencing wonder. There's a lot of states of the human mind, not all of them wonder. Also, I know a few of Critchleys books, and the last thing I'd call them is a product of a "poverty of mind."
@@jonwinsor9233 I’ve read Critchley too. I respect him as a scholar. Poverty of mind was a poor term for lack of wonder. But often we find these complaints about lack of wonder is thought of others not oneself. Blaming ‘modernity’ or the times is a dodge. No one is perfect and despair happens, but when scholars spin it into a system of belief to justify their own inner state or the presumed state of others they shouldn’t get a pass for this.