Talk:Mysticism

This edit changed

The perennial position is now "largely dismissed by scholars",^[1] most scholars using a contextual approach, which takes the cultural and historical context into consideration.

into

The perennial position is now "largely dismissed by scholars",^[1] most scholars using a contextual approach, which takes the cultural and historical context into consideration. It is widely considered, as pseudoscience.^[2][3][4][5]

Apart from put at the wrong place (is Perennialism pseudo-science?), it also doesn't summarise the article, but adds a new statement, without providing any context, and ignoring any and all explanations in the Wiki-article. The statement seems to target another topic, namely the paranormal. NB: Pseudoscience and Extraordinary Claims of the Paranormal doesn't even mention the term "mysticism." Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:51, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

No no no it's not like that.. lemme ping some skeptics and scholars who knew that mysticism is a pseudoscience ie not dependent upon scientific methods or research that really satisfies it as a "science". @JzG: @Guy Macon: @MjolnirPants: @PaleoNeonate:

Where in the article is there any statement that mysticism is a science?!? I think you're referring to this:

In the contemporary usage "mysticism" has become an umbrella term for all sorts of non-rational world views.^[1] William Harmless even states that mysticism has become "a catch-all for religious weirdness".^[2] Within the academic study of religion the apparent "unambiguous commonality" has become "opaque and controversial".^[3] The term "mysticism" is being used in different ways in different traditions.^[3] Some call to attention the conflation of mysticism and linked terms, such as spirituality and esotericism, and point at the differences between various traditions.^[4]

So, at best you could change

In the contemporary usage "mysticism" has become an umbrella term for all sorts of non-rational world views.^[1]

into

In the contemporary usage "mysticism" has become an umbrella term for all sorts of non-rational world views,^[1] parapsychology, and pseudoscience.^[2][3][4][5]

And them I'm still not sure that your references support this in an unambiguous way. But here are some of the sources that I found: . Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:21, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

The definition of pseudoscience is “statements, beliefs, or practices that are claimed to be both scientific and factual” and “something is being presented as science inaccurately or even deceptively.” Mysticism has never claimed to be science or scientific. So by definition, mysticism in not pseudoscience. There have been fake mystics, but they have never presented their claims as science. - Epinoia (talk) 05:28, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Fair enough for this.. per talk I can change it to the given modified statement given there, seems neutral and consistent to WP:FRINGE and WP:PSCI 182.58.254.0 (talk) 06:25, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Okay. I'll check and copy-edit your sources another time. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:53, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

I have made a proposal at Wikipedia: WikiProject Council for a new WikiProject - WikiProject Mysticism. Would any one like to join me in helping this project to get off the ground? This article would obviously be rated as Top Importance for this WikiProject. Vorbee (talk) 18:28, 25 April 2020 (UTC) It looks as if Wikipedia: WikiProject Mysticism has been created now, so I wonder whether any one who knows more about these things than me be able to say at the top of the talk page it would be of interest to this WikiProject? Many thanks, Vorbee (talk) 18:13, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Greeting, There is more than one issue. The article is included in a category "Articles with unsourced statements from December 2013" which fails the B-class criteria. The extensive "References" with 12 subsections might be a little overboard. I am not sure the common practice of using such an extensive "Notes" subsection but it is close to being an article within an article. The six subsections from "Religious and spiritual traditions" to the "Classical" subsection does not seem to follow any layout I have observed. -- Otr500 (talk) 02:35, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

The study of the Mystics is already acknowledged under the science wikipedia page.

I was wondering if we have started to define Mystic Sciene, the study of mystics under science just to start the validation, and defense. Confidently defining what is being studied as a science is a step to getting our minds validated in the truth we live without changing what we learn. Supernova004 (talk) 19:01, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

The text says that the origin of the word mysticism is the Greek verb μύω and that it is still in use in modern Greek with a different meaning, that of "to initiate someone". This is inaccurate. The verb that means to initiate someone and is still in use is μυώ. The former, μύω means "to close" in ancient Greek and is not in use in modern Greek. The latter, μυώ is the verb that is still in use in modern Greek and means "to initiate" as the article correctly says. The two verbs differ only in the placement of the stress; yet they are two different verbs belonging to different verb conjugations as well. Wandering ant (talk) 13:19, 13 February 2025 (UTC)