(with page references to what is now the Touchtone Books edition)
Beware: these notes are quickly put together from classroom handouts over the past several years. They are not consistent in the kinds of things they attempt, nor thorough in coverage, and undoubtedly need to be improved. They are offered as a study aid in process.
1. Note the difference (that James, among others, notes--pp. 25-26) between statements expressing claims about matters of fact and claims expressing judgments of value.
2. "Heathy-mindedness" is a title used to DESCRIBE an attitude, not to RECOMMEND an orientation. James is NOT saying that if you want enhanced health you should embrace this type of religion.
3. Consider differentiating between attitudes that are associated in the same category by James: (1) Pantheism affirms that everything is divine; or everything that happens is expressive of the will of God; or we're all already perfect, except that some of us don't realize it yet. Pantheism is criticised by those people who insist that it is important to realize the importance of human choices between good and evil, important to recognize that perfection is our destiny, not our present status. (2) One need not be a pantheist in order to enjoy religious experiences in which the divine presence is so fulfilling and pervading that one celebrates that the divine is, that the divine is in us, and that we are in the divine. (3) It may even be inconsistent with pantheism (though consistent with some varieties of what James calls "healthy-mindedness" to cultivate a vigorously affirmative--"to feast upon uncertainty, to fatten upon disappointment, to enthuse over apparent defeat, to invigorate in the presence of difficulties, to exhibit indomitable courage in the face of immensity, and to exercise unconquerable faith when confronted with the challenge of the inexplicable."
4. While, strictly speaking, James does not make a universal generalization that religion is a quest for happiness, on the first page of his initial lecture on healthy-mindedness, his pragmatism orients him toward the view that religion is a solution for some uneasiness or dissatisfaction. The question remains: does the happiness come as a by-product of spiritual discovery, or shall we use the term "spiritual discovery" as a name for whatever brings a certain kind of happiness? In other words, is there any possible insight here? The people that James records as having powerful spiritual experiences tend to speak as people who have realized truth. James's psychological approach treats them as people who have had experiences that they interpret in certain ways. Does his approach enable him to do justice to his topic? The question may be put in a different way. Suppose one has a religious experience such that, during that time, there was no occasion to question the meaning of what was occurring. Looking back, one can consider how to interpret it. One has (at least) two options: (1) to affirm the apparent meaningfulness of the experience and to live and speak from the stance made possible by that affirmation; (2) to describe conservatively: to affirm the obvious fact of the experience while introducing an epistemological qualification about the "overbeliefs" one uses to describe it. That epistemological qualification can range from (a) an acknowledgement of human limitations to (b) agnosticism to the claim that doing (a) honestly requires (b).
Lectures 6-7 The Sick Soul. Life has a way, sooner or later, of bringing you into evil or difficulties or pain and suffering so great that a simplistic affirmation of religious happiness doesn't speak deeply enough to your need (140). WJ insists that he is simply describing, however, not arguing against the religion of "healthy-mindedness." Moreover, some types of body-and-mind need the strong medicine of a kind of religion that moves through the depths of agony (cf. Job, "I abhor myself") in order to ascend to the heights of affirmation (139).
The facts of evil make it hard for a theology that takes God as a Total dominant One. A pluralistic philosophy makes more sense: the believer may worship God as good so long as God is supreme (not all-powerful, but most powerful, by comparison to a plurality of independently originating beings) and goodness wins out in the end (117; 141).
Depression has different degrees: a flat lack of enjoyment in things (127), a "positive and active anguish" (129). The theme of depression may be the meaninglessness of life, the vanity of mortal things (Tolstoy--130-35), the wretchedness of the self (Bunyan--136-37), or fear--even panic--of the universe (138-39).
Facts, by themselves, however, do not determine the values that our feelings may sense. Facts that appear to justify pessimism and resignation for one person provide another person with a stimulus to heroic effort and the mobilization of faith-vision (130-31).
Note that WJ, despite his lecture one acceptance of the causal claims of the medical materialist, affirms that our wonderful passions are "gifts to us, from sources sometimes low and sometimes high" (131).
Lecture 8. The Divided Self, and the Process of Its Unification. WJ characterizes the religion of the twice-born with reference to a common traditional generalization about religious discipline: first you must uproot your attachment to the goods of this world before the higher life can genuinely emerge (143--do you agree?). (The once-born are those simply positive affirming types discussed in lectures 4-5.)
Some people have a high degree of inner psychological conflict. Insofar as we do have inner conflict, "the normal evolution of character chiefly consists in the straightening out and unifying of the inner self. The higher and the lower feelings, the useful and the erring impulses, begin by being a comparative chaos within us--they must end by forming a stable system of functions in right subordination. Unhappiness is apt to characterize the period of order-making and struggle" (146).
The conflict can be agonizing indeed "when the higher wishes lack just that last acuteness, that touch of explosive intensity . . .that enables them to burst their shell, and make irruption efficaciously into life, and quell the lower tendencies forever" (148).
The process of unification to a new quality of firmness, stability, and equilibrium may be gradual or sudden, religious or irreligious. In persons with positive religious outcomes, "they could and did find something welling up in the inner reaches of their consciousness, by which such extreme sadness could be overcome. Tolstoy does well to talk of it as that by which men live; for that is exactly what it is, a stimulus, an excitement, a faith, a fore that re-infuses the positive willingness to live, even in full presence of the evil perceptions that erewhile made life seem unbearable" (159). A small additional stimulus "will overthrow the mind into a new state of equilibrium when the process of preparation and incubation has proceeded far enough" (151n).
[Comment. Realizing that many of his people were at the parting of the ways, Joshua put the decision before them:"Choose this day whom you will serve." If there is a moment where we forever and finally say YES or NO to God and/or the universe adventure of progress in truth, beauty, and goodness, our decision at the parting of the ways is prepared partly in our subconscious, as the results of attitudes we choose and decisions we make incubate until they are ready to burst into consciousness in full force. WJ here sees an aspect of the subconscious that Freud, as far as I know, did not observe. Our conscious attitudes and commitments, our daily life of decision-action scatters seeds that grow subconsciously. We do well, therefore, to be aware what sort of seed we thus sow. A man said, "My life is a fight between two dogs--one is good and noble, the other vicious and hostile." His companion said, "And which dog wins?" The reply came back, "The one I feed." Such thinking is, at least, deeply compatible with WJ.]
Conversion =" the process, gradual or sudden, by which a self hitherto divided, and consciously wrong inferior and unhappy, becomes unified and consciously right superior and happy, in consequence of its firmer hold upon religious realities" 160).
Stephen H. Bradley's case shows how "one may find one unsuspected depth below another, as if the possibilities of character lay disposed in a series of layers or shells" (160).
"Transformation" suggest a permanent changes in the habitual center of [a person's] personal energy (165), expelling any competing centre of gravity (166) in the soul (163)--Buddhists or Humians can perfectly well describe the facts in . . . phenomenal terms" (164). Psychology cannot account for all the factors involved in a particular case (165).
Suggestion and imitation play a large role in many cases, but not all (168, 189).
Some conversions are purely ethical (170), w.o.r.t. religion.
Some persons can't imagine the invisible or are permanently "barren" or "dry," or doubts keep subverting their faith, or they lack the capacity for religious responsiveness, though perhaps only temporarily (171).
Surrender, Releasing effort (after emotional exhaustion of exertion) often opens the gates (172), though there are volitional types as well, more gradual, though not without sudden forward steps. Most of us are more preoccupied with the bad in ourselves than with the glories of the new and better way (174). The personal will is inferior to the higher powers in the subconscious (175).
Psychology and religion are in harmony, except that psychology's vocabulary, e.g., of subconscious incubation (173), carries [reductionistic implications] (176). We leave the question open and inquire further. Theology concludes that the spirit of God is present in such dramatic moments (187).
There is a tendency of people and traditions that emphasize conversion to assert that only those who have gone through such an experience can be saved or sanctified (188ff).
Maybe the causes are ordinary, while the fruits are divine (189).
Psychology's discovery of the unconscious offers a key to explaining why conversion happens to some--those with a wider and more active subconscious field, sponsoring a wide variety of incursions, activities, and experiences, some pathological, including automatic writing or speech, post-hypnotic suggestion, hallucination (190-95). You can predict sudden conversion in those who have "first, pronounced emotional sensibility; second, tendency to automatism; and third, suggestibility of the passive type" (197). The value of violent emotional experiences leading to conversion is disputed even among revivalists (204-05); mescal[ine] can stimulate hallucinations (206).
Causes? "The subject is really complex"; "subconscious incubation explains a great number of these experiences" (194n). The meaning and value of conversion experiences for a person's life have to do simply with the consequences for the kind of life that results--whether or not physiological or divine--or diabolical--factors played any role (195). Referring to the subconscious does not exclude the divine, which may only operate through the subconscious (198-9). In fact, there is no chasm separating converts from others, but a continuum (195). The main thing is that it makes a great difference to the individual to begin a new direction, even if others may be far more advanced along the way (196).
Conceptual, intellectual belief is not crucial (201).
The affective state of assurance is distinguished by (1) peace, harmony, loss of all worry, a willingness to be; (2) the sense of perceiving truths not known before (sometimes--see later on mysticism--ineffable); and (3) the world looks new (202).
It's common to report diminished feelings after conversion, though the convictions usually endure (209-10).
Questions for class discussion.
What varieties of the quest for perfection have you observed or experienced? What interpretations can be given of such a quest?
Pp. 254-55: Note James's subtle differentiation between varieties of asceticism. Contrast this with the conventional comment on "Cartesian dualism and the hatred of the body that has resulted from our alienated view of our true selves as being separate from the body, from nature, from the earth, from animals." Which, if any, of the varieties of asceticism that James mentions seem to represent the dualistic hatred of the body that is so generally attributed to ascetics? Is the our culture, past or present, pervaded by hatred of the body? By identification with the body? Is it possible to subordinate the interests of the body to other values without setting up an unhealthy division within the self?
Pp. 272-73: Note James's discussion of need and importance of being able to make a decision "forever and finally" to reject and evil or affirm a good. What does such a decision feel like? What does it feel like to face such a decision? To avoid such a decision?
Pp. 278-84: Carefully explain the difference between theology from above (described in the second paragraph of "The Value of Saintliness" and James's empirical method (described in the subsequent paragraphs)?
Pp. 287-88: In what way does this passage (and this chapter generally--especially for those of you who have read the whole thing) respond to the criticism of James that he distorts religion by studying extreme and pathological examples? Can you see another aspect to James's pluralism in this passage? What is James's recipe for balance in life? What ideas do you have about how to achieve balance in human living?
The Value of Saintliness (Lectures 14 and 15)
[I] Having portrayed the fruits of religious experience, it is time to evaluate them (261).
[II] Our method (261-67) will not be dogmatic (using a doctrine of elements of the human being), but empirical.
We cannot, however, dispense with the theological judgments implicit in the general cultural evolution resulting in our common sense rejection of certain religious ideas and ideals (262-64). Religions have supplanted others by their attractions, satisfying new human needs (263).
We can hope not for certainty but for reasonable probability in our conclusions (265).
Since people differ biopsychologically, their religious needs and corresponding beliefs, ideals, and practices will differ (265).
[III] Again, we're looking at genuine individual experience, not institutionalized fossilizations, with the institutional drive to domination.
Yes, beware excess; but the error is generally lack of equally strong balancing factors (271).
[IV] Saintly Attributes
[A] Devoutness, whose narrow-minded extreme is fanaticism (271-77, including accounts of dubious "revelations").
[B] Purity (277)
[C] Tenderness and Charity--which must be adjusted to the recipient (Spencer) (281-85). These saints have surprisingly increased goodness in many people; "they are impregnators of the world, vivifiers and animators of potentialities of goodness" (284).
[D] Asceticism, which, despite its extremes, achieves heroism (285-92).
[V] Review and Conclusions (292-98)
Temperament in non-religious types may produce isolated characteristics, but not the cluster: felicity, purity, charity, patience, self-severity (not the same as complete perfection). Nietzsche is (in a sickly way) repulsed by them in contrast to vitalistic heroism (represented by the difference between men and women) (293-95).
No one ideal is right for every type of person/situation (295). Adaptation to diverse environments is essential and problematic (296-7). All saints to a degree bring or herald the success of their kind of strength (297).
To criticize his humanistic evaluation in the name of religious truth begs the question of the truth of the religion to which the critic appeals.
Questions on William James's chapter on Mysticism
1. Why would "mysticism" sometimes be used as a pejorative term (299)?
2. What do the following terms mean: ineffable, noetic, transient, passive (299-301), monism, and pantheism (326ff)?
3. James proposes a scale of several levels of mystical experience (301-303). What levels would you propose (301-303)?
4. What would you say about claims to mystical experience stimulated by alcohol and drugs?
5. What are your peak experiences of the beauties of nature? Describe a favorite place in nature. What are the meanings and values implicit in your enjoyment of that place?
6. How do you know (how does--or can--anyone know) the truth of religious experience?
7. How can mystic experience be interpreted within the framework of non-monistic religion (333)?
8. What does it take to open the opportunity to adventure in the realm of religious experience (335)?
CONCLUSIONS, Postscript, and . . .
(emphasize the list of common beliefs and psychological characteristics on p. 401. Note James' intention to pass beyond the [in some sense pragmatic] sense of subjective utility on 418. See the pragmatic characterisation of religion on 418. Pay special attention to 419, 422.1, 424.1.
DIALOGUE:
WJ: there are (a) experiences (coming from [422.1] or through [424.1] the subconscious) and (b) over-beliefs.
Critic: How
can you separate experience and belief? They
are so blended in [most] religious experience that WJ's handy distinction is
artificial.
WJ's point, to use an e x a m p l e, has been put in this way: "The idea of the personality of [God] is an enlarged and truer concept of God which has come to mankind chiefly through revelation. Reason, wisdom, and religious experience all infer and imply the personality of God, but they do not altogether validate it." What is here regarded as revelation I call over-belief--a belief that one can affirm only by going beyond what is evident in the experience itself.
Crit. WJ has too narrow a concept of religious experience, places too much attention on the extraordinary and dramatic experiences. Why not include as religious experiences even those ordinary life experiences in the life of a child or student when the individual acquires the ideas that are used as over-beliefs to interpret the more vivid religious experiences?
Other: But how do you Know that revelation has occurred? That, too, is something that you evaluate in terms of your personal religious experience (except insofar as you allow the influence of the religious group or its authorities to determine what you shall regard as revelation).
WJ: Profound and vivid religious experiences have a noetic quality (319); they inspire unshakable conviction (though many imitate such conviction because of group loyalties and personal insecurities). It is also true that these experiences can be described by psychology described play a role in the person's psychological history.