Mysticism
Media
Part of Mysticism
- Title
- Mysticism
- extracted text
-
Mysticism
BARRY MARKOVSKY and JAKE FREDERICK
Abstract
Mysticism and related concepts have appeared in a variety of academic and nonacademic contexts. We begin by narrowing our focus to several general definitions that
emphasize properties that have proved to be of interest to social and behavioral scientists. In such contexts, mystical knowledge typically refers to a special kind of
positive, life-changing sense of comprehending the universe, and a mystical experience is the physical and psychological state in which such knowledge is acquired,
and during which the experiencer feels “at one” with the universe and/or a higher
power. We review some of the earliest work on mysticism in psychology and sociology, primarily attributable to William James and Max Weber, respectively. More
recent work in psychology has focused mainly on the development of mysticism
scales, and research in neuropsychology is focusing on, among other topics, how
structures and processes in the human brain produce mystical experiences. Sociological research has been relatively meager; however, we do note the potential contributions that sociological perspectives might offer. We close with a discussion of
some methodological and theoretical issues that seem to hinder progress in the area,
and note several promising lines for future research.
INTRODUCTION
Mysticism most often refers to forms of purported knowledge and understanding frequently deemed life-changing, and whose very nature renders
them impossible to communicate in their full depth and breadth. Closely
related is the so-called mystical experience: a state of mind and body, usually
lasting between several minutes and several hours, through which mystical
knowledge and understanding are purported to be acquired. In more
extreme cases, mystical knowledge seems to the experiencer to have a very
special nature that is far removed from the realms of logic, language, the
senses, or any of our normal ways of apprehending the world. The knower
regards it to be highly profound, yet indescribable. Estimates of those who
have had an experience that minimally qualifies as mystical range from
one-third to one-half the population (Wulff, 2000, pp. 406–410), depending
on how the term is defined.
Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Edited by Robert Scott and Stephen Kosslyn.
© 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. ISBN 978-1-118-90077-2.
1
2
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Despite their ineffable nature, innumerable authors from dozens of perspectives have tried to describe, dissect, induce, and explain mystical experiences. Mystics, neuroscientists, and all manner of others in between have
written voluminously on the subject, bringing to bear a variety of preconceptions, rhetorical devices, introspection, and metaphysics in attempts to
communicate the incommunicable. In many of these writings, but not all,
the experiences are associated with religious beliefs. They are frequently, but
not necessarily, seen as stemming from restful, meditative states. They sometimes, but not always, entail the sense of a perfect oneness with the universe,
or of a fundamental connection or unity among all things, or of a connection with a singular god or other spiritual entity. Feelings of mystical insight
are achievable for some only as the result of years of self-inflicted pain and
deprivation. Others appear to conjure them up through simple meditation
techniques or floating in a sensory deprivation tank. (See Bishop, 1995; Cox,
2005; and Foreman, 1999 for discussions of varieties of mysticism and their
cultural/religious associations.)
The term mysticism has so many definitions, and is so multidisciplinary
and multifaceted, that a short review can only scratch its very broad surface.
We can only acknowledge the existence of vast non-scientific literatures on
the varied historical roots of contemporary forms of mysticism, and on their
many philosophical and theological ramifications. For curious readers looking for scientific treatments of this fascinating phenomenon, these literatures
will seem quite disheveled and impressionistic. Fortunately, approaches that
view mystical phenomena through the lenses of the behavioral and social
sciences are sometimes more coherent and systematic. Even in these fields,
however—perhaps owing to the subject’s many facets spread across so many
disciplines over so many years—one is hard-pressed to locate a foundation,
core, or cutting edge.
FOUNDATIONAL RESEARCH
It is difficult to pinpoint the “foundation” of something that manifests hardly
any structure. Such is the case with the conceptualization and study of mysticism. Narrowing our focus on the social and behavioral sciences, however,
we find work that is at least temporally foundational, that is, where topics
made some of their earliest appearances in the field.
Attempts to characterize mystical experiences for purposes of systematic investigation go back more than a century to William James (James,
1985[1902]; see also Barnard, 1998). His early attempts to answer key
questions set the stage for much of the work that followed: What is the
nature of the mystical experience? Is it a manifestation of culturally defined
categories, contact with a higher power, or self-delusion? Where is the
Mysticism
3
boundary between the experience itself and one’s interpretation of it?
James was not the first to ask such questions, but he was the first to call for
integrative answers involving drawing from what was then believed to be
true about the mind and brain, culture, and transcendent reality.
Not long after James’ work was published, one of sociology’s classical theorists wrote about mysticism as one component of a two-by-two typology of
religions. Weber (1978[1922]) saw mysticism and asceticism as both related
to religious salvation. However, asceticism, for him, was a set of procedures
enacted for purposes of achieving salvation, mysticism was treated as a state
of illumination, as in this passage (p. 544): “For the activity of contemplation to succeed in achieving its goal of mystic illumination, the extrusion
of all everyday mundane interests is always required.” Crossing the asceticism/mysticism distinction is an “inner-worldly/other-worldly” dichotomy,
that is, whether the religious practitioner is oriented toward evoking change
in the world versus whether s/he has no interests one way or the other in
worldly affairs. Ascetics would appear to have inner-worldly tendencies,
with mystics favoring other-worldly concerns.
Although writing over a half century later than James, philosopher Walter
T. Stace’s conceptualization of mysticism was seminal. Although not himself an empirical researcher, his categorization scheme for mystical experiences (Stace, 1960) eventually was adapted by psychologists in measures of
reported mystical experience (see later).
CUTTING-EDGE RESEARCH
Research on mysticism in the social and behavioral sciences is somewhat diffuse and sporadic, much of it motivated by philosophical debates rather than
by the explanation of human behavior. Most of the research is on psychology,
drawing on Hood’s (1975) mystical experience scale (e.g., Caird, 1988; Chen,
Zhang, Hood, & Watson, 2013, and Reinert & Stifler, 1993). The scale sought to
determine core properties of mystical experiences. Some of the applications
also make sociologically relevant comparisons between various populations,
religions, and social norms. For instance, gender orientation was found to
moderate the tendency to interpret an event as a mystical experience (e.g.
Mercer & Durham, 1999), and the mystical experiences reported by Iranian
Muslims and American Christians are comparable on some dimensions of
the scale but not others (Ghorbani & Watson, 2009; Hood et al., 2001). (Alternative scales have been developed by Lange & Thalbourne, 2007; Kohls &
Walach, 2006; and Thomas & Cooper, 1978).
There are at least several lines of sociological work that bear directly on
mysticism. Bourque (1969) measured the social correlates of those who
reported having mystical experiences. She concluded that religious and
4
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
secular respondents both reported transcendental experiences; however,
each identified a different source of their qualitatively similar experiences.
Campbell (1977) observed that, while mystical religions do not generate organizations and groups the way traditional religion does, they do
lead to “collectivities”—groups of people who share common values and
norms—and may be a factor in cult formation. Fox’s (1992) research used
data from a single General Social Survey question: “[Have you ever] felt
as though you were very close to a powerful spiritual force that seemed to
lift you out of yourself.” He found that, among other paranormal experiences, mystical experiences had unique response patterns that were stable
across time.
Some of the most interesting and sophisticated work on mysticism have
been on neuropsychology and are described by such labels as religious
experiences and God beliefs. The best known of this work is by Persinger
(1987); Persinger, 1999), for whom these phenomena fall squarely within the
realm of the so-called mystical experiences addressed by other scholars. As
he described it in the 1999 documentary film A Question of Miracles,
In the laboratory we have reproduced every aspect of the God experience … from
the rising sensation to the feelings of ecstasy, to the feelings of a sensed presence, to the feelings that you’re at one with the universe. … all of the depth of
emotions and compelling propensity to want to spread it to the world and to
share, often, with sincere emotion, their experiences. That’s basically the residual of just a few seconds of electrical activity within the normal human brain.
This is accomplished by stimulating the temporal lobes and the limbic system with complex electric fields. Several alternative theories and lines of
research are emerging still (see Biello, 2007; Wulff, 2000).
KEY ISSUES FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
THEORY
Unresolved definitional problems most likely are hindering progress in
mysticism research. Before any phenomenon can be usefully investigated,
an explicit provisional definition must be rendered. This means establishing
a term to which is assigned a set of abstract and general properties that
reliably excludes phenomena not possessing those properties, and reliably
identifies phenomena that possess them. It is essential to keep this in mind
when dealing with terms such as “mystic,” “mysticism,” and “mystical
experience,” each of which has been used in many different ways in different
literatures, usually without explicit definitions.
Mysticism
5
Theoretical definitions are neither right nor wrong, but certainly more or
less useful—or biasing—insofar as directing attention toward some phenomena and away from others. Shermer (2002), p. 20) defined mysticism as
“ … basing conclusions on personal insights that elude external validation.”
Radin (1997), p. 10), in contrast, defined it as “the direct perception of reality;
knowledge derived directly rather than indirectly.” Shermer, a renowned
skeptic of the paranormal, emphasized the scientific invalidity of mystical
insights, contrasting them with rationalism: “ … basing conclusions on
external validation.” Radin, an ardent proponent of parapsychology, used
his definition to downplay the difference between mysticism and rationalism:
“In many respects, mysticism is surprisingly similar to science in that it is a
systematic method of exploring the nature of the world.” Clearly, Shermer
and Radin may use the same terms, but they do not seem to be talking about
the same thing. In such a case, the relative values of theories employing
one or the other (or some alternative) definition must be assessed with
care. Different theories may benefit from different versions of “mysticism”;
however, nobody benefits unless the phenomena to which one is referring,
or not referring, are identifiable.
METHODS
With key terms under-defined or having too many definitions, and with relevant phenomena so unpredictable, it is not surprising that methods for studying mystical phenomena have seemed problematic. As Wulff (2000) noted,
for example, mysticism questionnaires tend to be open to varied interpretations by respondents. This may, however, be a case of the bad golfer blaming
his clubs for his poor performance. Advances in the methodological tools
available to researchers are of little value unless they are very clear about
what is it they need to measure, and toward what theoretical end. Although
some scholars (e.g., Stace, 1960) argue that the nature of mysticism places it
beyond the reach of rational inquiry, at least some of the conceptualizations
that we have reviewed refute such a claim and, at least in principle, should
permit measurement at high tolerances.
LINGERING EFFECTS
There is very little systematic research on the lingering effects of mystical
experiences. Anecdotal evidence suggests some possible common threads,
such as the intuition that the more potent experiences are more prone to
altering world-views and behaviors in significant ways. Unfortunately,
the unpredictability and ineffability of such experiences have made them
resistant to documentation and analysis. On the other hand, people seem to
6
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
very much enjoy sharing their experiences with others and are motivated to
articulate them. Given the explosion of Internet forums for self-revelation, it
seems that there may now be useful data that was unavailable as recently as
a decade ago.
PSYCHOLOGY
In recent years there has been a notable absence of rigorous and sustained
theory development and research on mysticism in the major subdisciplines
of psychology such as personality, developmental, cognitive, and perceptual.
Developments cited in Wulff’s (2000) thorough review occurred primarily in
the 1970s and 1980s. Again, part of the problem may be due to the elusiveness
of the phenomenon itself. It may be argued that psychology’s greatest strides
in the last century have occurred in areas where it has been possible to gather
data from large numbers of cases, and/or to conduct controlled laboratory
experiments, and/or to gather responses using reliable and well-validated
questionnaires. Naturally occurring mystical experiences are too transient to
study using traditional methods, and there are many problems—theoretical,
methodological, and ethical, to mention a few—with the prospect of inducing
such experiences artificially.
NEUROPSYCHOLOGY
The various dimensions along which mystical experiences have been typed
may appear noteworthy to the experiencer or researcher, but represent identical underlying brain functions filtered through the lenses of idiosyncratic
experience or social context. Currently there are no agreed-upon biological
markers for mystical experiences (Wulff, 2000, pp. 405–406), making this
a potentially crucial area for future research. At the same time, neural
imaging methods have advanced, and researchers continue to investigate
correlates between religious/mystical experience, psychological states, and
neurophysiological processes. (See Biello, 2007; Booth, Koren, & Persinger,
2005; Harris et al., 2009; Kapogiannisa et al., 2009; Urgesi, Aglioti, Skrap, &
Fabbro, 2010). There has been so much new activity in this area that new
subdisciplinary labels are emerging, such as “neurotheology” and “spiritual
neuroscience.”
SOCIOLOGY
Perhaps owing to its strong psychological component, mysticism has
received relatively meager attention by sociologists. This is despite the
early attention from Max Weber, one of sociology’s “founding fathers.”
Mysticism
7
There are many avenues for potentially fruitful research and theory. The
sociology of religion is a vibrant subfield with some prior history of mysticism research (cited earlier), and a logical home for further developments.
In addition, every major sociological topic—status, power, gender, class,
occupation, inequality, family, institutions, deviance, social movements, and
more—potentially intersects with mystical experiences, either as precipitating conditions or as contexts where the impacts of such experiences may be
traced. As sociologists ourselves, we could bemoan the lack of sociological
involvement in such a vibrant topic. On the other hand, this also means that
sociology holds great potential for offering new insights not likely to emerge
from other fields.
REFERENCES
Barnard, G. W. (1998). William James and the origins of mystical experience.
In R. K. C. Forman (Ed.), The innate capacity: Mysticism, psychology, and philosophy
(pp. 161–210). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Biello, D. (2007). Searching for God in the brain. Scientific American Mind, 18, 38–45.
Bishop, D. H. (1995). Mysticism and the mystical experience. Cranbury, NJ: Associated
University Presses.
Booth, J. N., Koren, S. A., & Persinger, M. A. (2005). Increased feelings of the sensed
presence and increased geomagnetic activity at the time of the experience during
exposures to transcerebral weak complex magnetic fields. International Journal of
Neuroscience, 115, 1053–1079.
Bourque, L. B. (1969). Social correlates of transcendental experiences. Sociology of Religion, 30, 151–163.
Caird, D. (1988). The structure of Hood’s mysticism scale: A factor-analytic study.
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 27, 122–127.
Campbell, C. (1977). Clarifying the cult. The British Journal of Sociology, 28, 375–388.
Chen, Z., Zhang, Y., Hood, R. W., & Watson, P. J. (2013). Mysticism in Chinese Christians and non-Christians: Measurement invariance of the mysticism scale and
implications for the mean differences. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 22, 155–168.
Cox, W. (2005). Mysticism and the origins of world religions. Airway Heights, WA: CCG
Publishing.
Foreman, R. K. C. (1999). Mysticism, mind, consciousness. Albany: SUNY Press.
Fox, J. W. (1992). The structure, stability, and social antecedents of reported paranormal experiences. Sociological Analysis, 53, 417–431.
Ghorbani, N., & Watson, P. J. (2009). Mysticism and self-determination in Iran:
Multidimensional complexity of relationships with basic need satisfaction and
mindfulness. Archive for the Psychology of Religion, 31, 75–90.
Harris, S., Kaplan, J. T., Curiel, A., Bookheimer, S. Y., Iacoboni, M., & Cohen, M. S.
(2009). The neural correlates of religious and nonreligious belief. PLoS ONE, 4(10),
e7272. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0007272
8
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Hood, R. W. (1975). The construction and preliminary validation of a measure
of reported mystical experience. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 14,
29–41.
Hood, R. W., Ghorbani, N., Watson, P. J., Ghramaleki, A. F., Bing, M. N., Davidson, H.
K., … Williamson, W. P. (2001). Dimensions of the mysticism scale: Confirming the
three-factor structure in the United States and Iran. Journal for the Scientific Study
of Religion, 40, 691–705.
James, W. (1985 [1902]). The varieties of religious experience. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Kapogiannisa, D., Barbeya, A. K., Sua, M., Zambonia, G., Kruegera, F., & Grafmana,
J. (2009). Cognitive and neural foundations of religious belief. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, 106, 4876–4881. doi:10.1073/pnas.0811717106
Kohls, N., & Walach, H. (2006). Exceptional experiences and spiritual practice: A new
measurement approach. Spirituality and Health International, 7, 125–150.
Lange, R., & Thalbourne, M. A. (2007). The Rasch scaling of mystical experiences:
Construct validity and correlates of the mystical experience scale (MES). The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 17, 121–140.
Mercer, C., & Durham, T. W. (1999). Religious mysticism and gender orientation.
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 38, 175–182.
Persinger, M. A. (1987). Neuropsychological bases of God beliefs. New York: Praeger.
Persinger, M. A. (1999 Narration by the author in the documentary). A question of miracles. New York: American Artists Productions, distributed by Home Box Office.
Radin, D. (1997). The conscious universe. San Francisco: Harper Edge.
Reinert, D. F., & Stifler, K. R. (1993). Hood’s mysticism scale revisited: A
factor-analytic replication. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 32, 383–388.
Shermer, M. (2002). Why people believe weird things (Revised and Expanded ed.). New
York: A.W.H. Freeman & Co.
Stace, W. T. (1960). Mysticism and philosophy. NY: J.B. Lippincott Company.
Thomas, E., & Cooper, P. E. (1978). Measurement and incidence of mystical experiences: An exploratory study. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 17,
433–437.
Urgesi, C., Aglioti, S. M., Skrap, M., & Fabbro, F. (2010). The spiritual brain: Selective cortical lesions modulate human self-transcendence. Neuron, 65, 309–319.
doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2010.01.026
Weber, M. (1978 [1922]). Economy and society. Berkeley, CA: University of California
Press.
Wulff, D. M. (2000). Mystical experience. In E. Cardeña, S. J. Lynn & S. Krippner (Eds.), Varieties of anomalous experience: Examining the scientific evidence
(pp. 397–440). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
FURTHER READING
Hardison, R. (1988). Upon the shoulders of giants. New York, NY: University Press of
America.
Mysticism
9
BARRY MARKOVSKY SHORT BIOGRAPHY
Barry Markovsky is Professor of Sociology at the University of South Carolina and Director at the Laboratory for Sociological Research. He received
his PhD in Sociology from Stanford University. Prior to South Carolina, he
was with the University of Iowa faculty (1983–2001) and served as Sociology
Program Director at the National Science Foundation (1997–1999). He has
conducted grant-funded research on a variety of topics including power in
social networks, perceptions of fairness in public goods settings, and the
interplay of social status and in-group/out-group identification. He also
teaches and writes extensively on issues pertaining to theory construction
in the social sciences, including methods for improving the efficiency of
knowledge development. Currently, he is working on an NSF-sponsored
project that will establish a “Wikitheoria” website with tools for the development, integration, and dissemination of sociological theories. In 2012,
he was elected to the Sociological Research Association, and in 2011 was
proud to receive the National Advisor of the Year Award from the Secular
Student Alliance. His work is profiled in The Encyclopedia of Social Theory
(Sage Publications, 2005).
Professional webpage: http://artsandsciences.sc.edu/socy/
Barry_Markovsky.
University of South Carolina Sociology: http://artsandsciences.sc.edu/
socy/home
Laboratory for Sociological Research: http://www.artsandsciences.sc.
edu/socylab/
JAKE FREDERICK SHORT BIOGRAPHY
Jake Frederick is a PhD candidate in the Department of Sociology at
the University of South Carolina. He received his BS in Sociology from
Texas A&M University. His interests are in the areas of social psychology,
group processes, pro-social behavior, theory construction, and experimental
methods. His MA thesis was a reformulation of Sheldon Stryker’s identity
theory. Currently, he is in the process of developing his doctoral dissertation
prospectus.
Professional webpage: http://artsandsciences.sc.edu/socy/J_Frederick.
University of South Carolina Sociology: http://artsandsciences.sc.edu/
socy/home
Laboratory for Sociological Research: http://www.artsandsciences.sc.
edu/socylab/
10
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
RELATED ESSAYS
Lived Religion (Sociology), Nancy T. Ammerman
Gender, Religion, and State in the Middle East (Sociology), Mounira M. Charrad and Amina Zarrugh
Institutional Change in American Religion (Sociology), Casey Clevenger and
Wendy Cadge
Niche Construction: Implications for Human Sciences (Anthropology), Kevin
N. Laland and Michael O’Brien
Trends in Religiosity and Religious Affiliation (Sociology), Kevin J. Christiano
Religion (Anthropology), Benjamin Grant Purzycki et al.
Atheism, Agnosticism, and Irreligion (Sociology), Buster G. Smith and Joseph
O. Baker
-
Mysticism
BARRY MARKOVSKY and JAKE FREDERICK
Abstract
Mysticism and related concepts have appeared in a variety of academic and nonacademic contexts. We begin by narrowing our focus to several general definitions that
emphasize properties that have proved to be of interest to social and behavioral scientists. In such contexts, mystical knowledge typically refers to a special kind of
positive, life-changing sense of comprehending the universe, and a mystical experience is the physical and psychological state in which such knowledge is acquired,
and during which the experiencer feels “at one” with the universe and/or a higher
power. We review some of the earliest work on mysticism in psychology and sociology, primarily attributable to William James and Max Weber, respectively. More
recent work in psychology has focused mainly on the development of mysticism
scales, and research in neuropsychology is focusing on, among other topics, how
structures and processes in the human brain produce mystical experiences. Sociological research has been relatively meager; however, we do note the potential contributions that sociological perspectives might offer. We close with a discussion of
some methodological and theoretical issues that seem to hinder progress in the area,
and note several promising lines for future research.
INTRODUCTION
Mysticism most often refers to forms of purported knowledge and understanding frequently deemed life-changing, and whose very nature renders
them impossible to communicate in their full depth and breadth. Closely
related is the so-called mystical experience: a state of mind and body, usually
lasting between several minutes and several hours, through which mystical
knowledge and understanding are purported to be acquired. In more
extreme cases, mystical knowledge seems to the experiencer to have a very
special nature that is far removed from the realms of logic, language, the
senses, or any of our normal ways of apprehending the world. The knower
regards it to be highly profound, yet indescribable. Estimates of those who
have had an experience that minimally qualifies as mystical range from
one-third to one-half the population (Wulff, 2000, pp. 406–410), depending
on how the term is defined.
Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Edited by Robert Scott and Stephen Kosslyn.
© 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. ISBN 978-1-118-90077-2.
1
2
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Despite their ineffable nature, innumerable authors from dozens of perspectives have tried to describe, dissect, induce, and explain mystical experiences. Mystics, neuroscientists, and all manner of others in between have
written voluminously on the subject, bringing to bear a variety of preconceptions, rhetorical devices, introspection, and metaphysics in attempts to
communicate the incommunicable. In many of these writings, but not all,
the experiences are associated with religious beliefs. They are frequently, but
not necessarily, seen as stemming from restful, meditative states. They sometimes, but not always, entail the sense of a perfect oneness with the universe,
or of a fundamental connection or unity among all things, or of a connection with a singular god or other spiritual entity. Feelings of mystical insight
are achievable for some only as the result of years of self-inflicted pain and
deprivation. Others appear to conjure them up through simple meditation
techniques or floating in a sensory deprivation tank. (See Bishop, 1995; Cox,
2005; and Foreman, 1999 for discussions of varieties of mysticism and their
cultural/religious associations.)
The term mysticism has so many definitions, and is so multidisciplinary
and multifaceted, that a short review can only scratch its very broad surface.
We can only acknowledge the existence of vast non-scientific literatures on
the varied historical roots of contemporary forms of mysticism, and on their
many philosophical and theological ramifications. For curious readers looking for scientific treatments of this fascinating phenomenon, these literatures
will seem quite disheveled and impressionistic. Fortunately, approaches that
view mystical phenomena through the lenses of the behavioral and social
sciences are sometimes more coherent and systematic. Even in these fields,
however—perhaps owing to the subject’s many facets spread across so many
disciplines over so many years—one is hard-pressed to locate a foundation,
core, or cutting edge.
FOUNDATIONAL RESEARCH
It is difficult to pinpoint the “foundation” of something that manifests hardly
any structure. Such is the case with the conceptualization and study of mysticism. Narrowing our focus on the social and behavioral sciences, however,
we find work that is at least temporally foundational, that is, where topics
made some of their earliest appearances in the field.
Attempts to characterize mystical experiences for purposes of systematic investigation go back more than a century to William James (James,
1985[1902]; see also Barnard, 1998). His early attempts to answer key
questions set the stage for much of the work that followed: What is the
nature of the mystical experience? Is it a manifestation of culturally defined
categories, contact with a higher power, or self-delusion? Where is the
Mysticism
3
boundary between the experience itself and one’s interpretation of it?
James was not the first to ask such questions, but he was the first to call for
integrative answers involving drawing from what was then believed to be
true about the mind and brain, culture, and transcendent reality.
Not long after James’ work was published, one of sociology’s classical theorists wrote about mysticism as one component of a two-by-two typology of
religions. Weber (1978[1922]) saw mysticism and asceticism as both related
to religious salvation. However, asceticism, for him, was a set of procedures
enacted for purposes of achieving salvation, mysticism was treated as a state
of illumination, as in this passage (p. 544): “For the activity of contemplation to succeed in achieving its goal of mystic illumination, the extrusion
of all everyday mundane interests is always required.” Crossing the asceticism/mysticism distinction is an “inner-worldly/other-worldly” dichotomy,
that is, whether the religious practitioner is oriented toward evoking change
in the world versus whether s/he has no interests one way or the other in
worldly affairs. Ascetics would appear to have inner-worldly tendencies,
with mystics favoring other-worldly concerns.
Although writing over a half century later than James, philosopher Walter
T. Stace’s conceptualization of mysticism was seminal. Although not himself an empirical researcher, his categorization scheme for mystical experiences (Stace, 1960) eventually was adapted by psychologists in measures of
reported mystical experience (see later).
CUTTING-EDGE RESEARCH
Research on mysticism in the social and behavioral sciences is somewhat diffuse and sporadic, much of it motivated by philosophical debates rather than
by the explanation of human behavior. Most of the research is on psychology,
drawing on Hood’s (1975) mystical experience scale (e.g., Caird, 1988; Chen,
Zhang, Hood, & Watson, 2013, and Reinert & Stifler, 1993). The scale sought to
determine core properties of mystical experiences. Some of the applications
also make sociologically relevant comparisons between various populations,
religions, and social norms. For instance, gender orientation was found to
moderate the tendency to interpret an event as a mystical experience (e.g.
Mercer & Durham, 1999), and the mystical experiences reported by Iranian
Muslims and American Christians are comparable on some dimensions of
the scale but not others (Ghorbani & Watson, 2009; Hood et al., 2001). (Alternative scales have been developed by Lange & Thalbourne, 2007; Kohls &
Walach, 2006; and Thomas & Cooper, 1978).
There are at least several lines of sociological work that bear directly on
mysticism. Bourque (1969) measured the social correlates of those who
reported having mystical experiences. She concluded that religious and
4
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
secular respondents both reported transcendental experiences; however,
each identified a different source of their qualitatively similar experiences.
Campbell (1977) observed that, while mystical religions do not generate organizations and groups the way traditional religion does, they do
lead to “collectivities”—groups of people who share common values and
norms—and may be a factor in cult formation. Fox’s (1992) research used
data from a single General Social Survey question: “[Have you ever] felt
as though you were very close to a powerful spiritual force that seemed to
lift you out of yourself.” He found that, among other paranormal experiences, mystical experiences had unique response patterns that were stable
across time.
Some of the most interesting and sophisticated work on mysticism have
been on neuropsychology and are described by such labels as religious
experiences and God beliefs. The best known of this work is by Persinger
(1987); Persinger, 1999), for whom these phenomena fall squarely within the
realm of the so-called mystical experiences addressed by other scholars. As
he described it in the 1999 documentary film A Question of Miracles,
In the laboratory we have reproduced every aspect of the God experience … from
the rising sensation to the feelings of ecstasy, to the feelings of a sensed presence, to the feelings that you’re at one with the universe. … all of the depth of
emotions and compelling propensity to want to spread it to the world and to
share, often, with sincere emotion, their experiences. That’s basically the residual of just a few seconds of electrical activity within the normal human brain.
This is accomplished by stimulating the temporal lobes and the limbic system with complex electric fields. Several alternative theories and lines of
research are emerging still (see Biello, 2007; Wulff, 2000).
KEY ISSUES FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
THEORY
Unresolved definitional problems most likely are hindering progress in
mysticism research. Before any phenomenon can be usefully investigated,
an explicit provisional definition must be rendered. This means establishing
a term to which is assigned a set of abstract and general properties that
reliably excludes phenomena not possessing those properties, and reliably
identifies phenomena that possess them. It is essential to keep this in mind
when dealing with terms such as “mystic,” “mysticism,” and “mystical
experience,” each of which has been used in many different ways in different
literatures, usually without explicit definitions.
Mysticism
5
Theoretical definitions are neither right nor wrong, but certainly more or
less useful—or biasing—insofar as directing attention toward some phenomena and away from others. Shermer (2002), p. 20) defined mysticism as
“ … basing conclusions on personal insights that elude external validation.”
Radin (1997), p. 10), in contrast, defined it as “the direct perception of reality;
knowledge derived directly rather than indirectly.” Shermer, a renowned
skeptic of the paranormal, emphasized the scientific invalidity of mystical
insights, contrasting them with rationalism: “ … basing conclusions on
external validation.” Radin, an ardent proponent of parapsychology, used
his definition to downplay the difference between mysticism and rationalism:
“In many respects, mysticism is surprisingly similar to science in that it is a
systematic method of exploring the nature of the world.” Clearly, Shermer
and Radin may use the same terms, but they do not seem to be talking about
the same thing. In such a case, the relative values of theories employing
one or the other (or some alternative) definition must be assessed with
care. Different theories may benefit from different versions of “mysticism”;
however, nobody benefits unless the phenomena to which one is referring,
or not referring, are identifiable.
METHODS
With key terms under-defined or having too many definitions, and with relevant phenomena so unpredictable, it is not surprising that methods for studying mystical phenomena have seemed problematic. As Wulff (2000) noted,
for example, mysticism questionnaires tend to be open to varied interpretations by respondents. This may, however, be a case of the bad golfer blaming
his clubs for his poor performance. Advances in the methodological tools
available to researchers are of little value unless they are very clear about
what is it they need to measure, and toward what theoretical end. Although
some scholars (e.g., Stace, 1960) argue that the nature of mysticism places it
beyond the reach of rational inquiry, at least some of the conceptualizations
that we have reviewed refute such a claim and, at least in principle, should
permit measurement at high tolerances.
LINGERING EFFECTS
There is very little systematic research on the lingering effects of mystical
experiences. Anecdotal evidence suggests some possible common threads,
such as the intuition that the more potent experiences are more prone to
altering world-views and behaviors in significant ways. Unfortunately,
the unpredictability and ineffability of such experiences have made them
resistant to documentation and analysis. On the other hand, people seem to
6
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
very much enjoy sharing their experiences with others and are motivated to
articulate them. Given the explosion of Internet forums for self-revelation, it
seems that there may now be useful data that was unavailable as recently as
a decade ago.
PSYCHOLOGY
In recent years there has been a notable absence of rigorous and sustained
theory development and research on mysticism in the major subdisciplines
of psychology such as personality, developmental, cognitive, and perceptual.
Developments cited in Wulff’s (2000) thorough review occurred primarily in
the 1970s and 1980s. Again, part of the problem may be due to the elusiveness
of the phenomenon itself. It may be argued that psychology’s greatest strides
in the last century have occurred in areas where it has been possible to gather
data from large numbers of cases, and/or to conduct controlled laboratory
experiments, and/or to gather responses using reliable and well-validated
questionnaires. Naturally occurring mystical experiences are too transient to
study using traditional methods, and there are many problems—theoretical,
methodological, and ethical, to mention a few—with the prospect of inducing
such experiences artificially.
NEUROPSYCHOLOGY
The various dimensions along which mystical experiences have been typed
may appear noteworthy to the experiencer or researcher, but represent identical underlying brain functions filtered through the lenses of idiosyncratic
experience or social context. Currently there are no agreed-upon biological
markers for mystical experiences (Wulff, 2000, pp. 405–406), making this
a potentially crucial area for future research. At the same time, neural
imaging methods have advanced, and researchers continue to investigate
correlates between religious/mystical experience, psychological states, and
neurophysiological processes. (See Biello, 2007; Booth, Koren, & Persinger,
2005; Harris et al., 2009; Kapogiannisa et al., 2009; Urgesi, Aglioti, Skrap, &
Fabbro, 2010). There has been so much new activity in this area that new
subdisciplinary labels are emerging, such as “neurotheology” and “spiritual
neuroscience.”
SOCIOLOGY
Perhaps owing to its strong psychological component, mysticism has
received relatively meager attention by sociologists. This is despite the
early attention from Max Weber, one of sociology’s “founding fathers.”
Mysticism
7
There are many avenues for potentially fruitful research and theory. The
sociology of religion is a vibrant subfield with some prior history of mysticism research (cited earlier), and a logical home for further developments.
In addition, every major sociological topic—status, power, gender, class,
occupation, inequality, family, institutions, deviance, social movements, and
more—potentially intersects with mystical experiences, either as precipitating conditions or as contexts where the impacts of such experiences may be
traced. As sociologists ourselves, we could bemoan the lack of sociological
involvement in such a vibrant topic. On the other hand, this also means that
sociology holds great potential for offering new insights not likely to emerge
from other fields.
REFERENCES
Barnard, G. W. (1998). William James and the origins of mystical experience.
In R. K. C. Forman (Ed.), The innate capacity: Mysticism, psychology, and philosophy
(pp. 161–210). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Biello, D. (2007). Searching for God in the brain. Scientific American Mind, 18, 38–45.
Bishop, D. H. (1995). Mysticism and the mystical experience. Cranbury, NJ: Associated
University Presses.
Booth, J. N., Koren, S. A., & Persinger, M. A. (2005). Increased feelings of the sensed
presence and increased geomagnetic activity at the time of the experience during
exposures to transcerebral weak complex magnetic fields. International Journal of
Neuroscience, 115, 1053–1079.
Bourque, L. B. (1969). Social correlates of transcendental experiences. Sociology of Religion, 30, 151–163.
Caird, D. (1988). The structure of Hood’s mysticism scale: A factor-analytic study.
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 27, 122–127.
Campbell, C. (1977). Clarifying the cult. The British Journal of Sociology, 28, 375–388.
Chen, Z., Zhang, Y., Hood, R. W., & Watson, P. J. (2013). Mysticism in Chinese Christians and non-Christians: Measurement invariance of the mysticism scale and
implications for the mean differences. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 22, 155–168.
Cox, W. (2005). Mysticism and the origins of world religions. Airway Heights, WA: CCG
Publishing.
Foreman, R. K. C. (1999). Mysticism, mind, consciousness. Albany: SUNY Press.
Fox, J. W. (1992). The structure, stability, and social antecedents of reported paranormal experiences. Sociological Analysis, 53, 417–431.
Ghorbani, N., & Watson, P. J. (2009). Mysticism and self-determination in Iran:
Multidimensional complexity of relationships with basic need satisfaction and
mindfulness. Archive for the Psychology of Religion, 31, 75–90.
Harris, S., Kaplan, J. T., Curiel, A., Bookheimer, S. Y., Iacoboni, M., & Cohen, M. S.
(2009). The neural correlates of religious and nonreligious belief. PLoS ONE, 4(10),
e7272. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0007272
8
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Hood, R. W. (1975). The construction and preliminary validation of a measure
of reported mystical experience. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 14,
29–41.
Hood, R. W., Ghorbani, N., Watson, P. J., Ghramaleki, A. F., Bing, M. N., Davidson, H.
K., … Williamson, W. P. (2001). Dimensions of the mysticism scale: Confirming the
three-factor structure in the United States and Iran. Journal for the Scientific Study
of Religion, 40, 691–705.
James, W. (1985 [1902]). The varieties of religious experience. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Kapogiannisa, D., Barbeya, A. K., Sua, M., Zambonia, G., Kruegera, F., & Grafmana,
J. (2009). Cognitive and neural foundations of religious belief. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, 106, 4876–4881. doi:10.1073/pnas.0811717106
Kohls, N., & Walach, H. (2006). Exceptional experiences and spiritual practice: A new
measurement approach. Spirituality and Health International, 7, 125–150.
Lange, R., & Thalbourne, M. A. (2007). The Rasch scaling of mystical experiences:
Construct validity and correlates of the mystical experience scale (MES). The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 17, 121–140.
Mercer, C., & Durham, T. W. (1999). Religious mysticism and gender orientation.
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 38, 175–182.
Persinger, M. A. (1987). Neuropsychological bases of God beliefs. New York: Praeger.
Persinger, M. A. (1999 Narration by the author in the documentary). A question of miracles. New York: American Artists Productions, distributed by Home Box Office.
Radin, D. (1997). The conscious universe. San Francisco: Harper Edge.
Reinert, D. F., & Stifler, K. R. (1993). Hood’s mysticism scale revisited: A
factor-analytic replication. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 32, 383–388.
Shermer, M. (2002). Why people believe weird things (Revised and Expanded ed.). New
York: A.W.H. Freeman & Co.
Stace, W. T. (1960). Mysticism and philosophy. NY: J.B. Lippincott Company.
Thomas, E., & Cooper, P. E. (1978). Measurement and incidence of mystical experiences: An exploratory study. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 17,
433–437.
Urgesi, C., Aglioti, S. M., Skrap, M., & Fabbro, F. (2010). The spiritual brain: Selective cortical lesions modulate human self-transcendence. Neuron, 65, 309–319.
doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2010.01.026
Weber, M. (1978 [1922]). Economy and society. Berkeley, CA: University of California
Press.
Wulff, D. M. (2000). Mystical experience. In E. Cardeña, S. J. Lynn & S. Krippner (Eds.), Varieties of anomalous experience: Examining the scientific evidence
(pp. 397–440). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
FURTHER READING
Hardison, R. (1988). Upon the shoulders of giants. New York, NY: University Press of
America.
Mysticism
9
BARRY MARKOVSKY SHORT BIOGRAPHY
Barry Markovsky is Professor of Sociology at the University of South Carolina and Director at the Laboratory for Sociological Research. He received
his PhD in Sociology from Stanford University. Prior to South Carolina, he
was with the University of Iowa faculty (1983–2001) and served as Sociology
Program Director at the National Science Foundation (1997–1999). He has
conducted grant-funded research on a variety of topics including power in
social networks, perceptions of fairness in public goods settings, and the
interplay of social status and in-group/out-group identification. He also
teaches and writes extensively on issues pertaining to theory construction
in the social sciences, including methods for improving the efficiency of
knowledge development. Currently, he is working on an NSF-sponsored
project that will establish a “Wikitheoria” website with tools for the development, integration, and dissemination of sociological theories. In 2012,
he was elected to the Sociological Research Association, and in 2011 was
proud to receive the National Advisor of the Year Award from the Secular
Student Alliance. His work is profiled in The Encyclopedia of Social Theory
(Sage Publications, 2005).
Professional webpage: http://artsandsciences.sc.edu/socy/
Barry_Markovsky.
University of South Carolina Sociology: http://artsandsciences.sc.edu/
socy/home
Laboratory for Sociological Research: http://www.artsandsciences.sc.
edu/socylab/
JAKE FREDERICK SHORT BIOGRAPHY
Jake Frederick is a PhD candidate in the Department of Sociology at
the University of South Carolina. He received his BS in Sociology from
Texas A&M University. His interests are in the areas of social psychology,
group processes, pro-social behavior, theory construction, and experimental
methods. His MA thesis was a reformulation of Sheldon Stryker’s identity
theory. Currently, he is in the process of developing his doctoral dissertation
prospectus.
Professional webpage: http://artsandsciences.sc.edu/socy/J_Frederick.
University of South Carolina Sociology: http://artsandsciences.sc.edu/
socy/home
Laboratory for Sociological Research: http://www.artsandsciences.sc.
edu/socylab/
10
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
RELATED ESSAYS
Lived Religion (Sociology), Nancy T. Ammerman
Gender, Religion, and State in the Middle East (Sociology), Mounira M. Charrad and Amina Zarrugh
Institutional Change in American Religion (Sociology), Casey Clevenger and
Wendy Cadge
Niche Construction: Implications for Human Sciences (Anthropology), Kevin
N. Laland and Michael O’Brien
Trends in Religiosity and Religious Affiliation (Sociology), Kevin J. Christiano
Religion (Anthropology), Benjamin Grant Purzycki et al.
Atheism, Agnosticism, and Irreligion (Sociology), Buster G. Smith and Joseph
O. Baker