{Mysticism and Science}[15th June 1988]

[Redbook5:160-161][19880615:1642f]{Mysticism and Science}[15^th June 1988]

.1642

[continued]

*But it is a surprise to have been able to include, as a result of a short essay written speculatively for New Scientist,** an analogy with withdrawal into a Monastery (or mysticism) (and to here!).*** This arises from the relative 'balance' of pure science at S~ with mysticism at R~, on the Outer Circle:

[Extracts of text from ms diagram shown above:]

		C~
Mysticism	R~		S~	'Pure' Science
'Pure'Art?	G~↑	|	↓M~	Technology
'Applied' Art?	J~		U~	Craftsmen, Mechanics etc.
		A~
		Trade & Industry

The implication is that you cannot normally develop**** from Mechanic to Technologist, or Technologist to 'Pure' Scientist – unless you were misplaced in the first instance – which seems about right; but that you can develop from Applied Art through Pure Art even to Religious Mysticism, which also seems possible, even if you were not misplaced in the first instance.

The point to note, however, is that whereas most Pure Scientists are going to stay where they are, or go down (get left behind by the advance of knowledge?) – for the Mystic, his arrival at R~(-C), the Transformation Point, is, as xS says in [2], 'only the beginning'. The end of the Inner Circle, at S~-C~, if reached here, may be something approaching Sainthood. Prophets, I guess, are there;# and no doubt some pure Scientists partake of this Inner Circle degree (Einstein?)

*[See last previous entry]

**[[Redbook5:148A-D][19880611:0000]{The Great Divide}[11^th June 1988]] p148A-D

***[[Redbook5:156-160][19880615:1642b]{Schizophrenia and Manic Depression (1)}[15^th June 1988], (fn#)]

[‘Here’ is presumably [CH]]

****{But what about the Inner Circle? (See [[Redbook5:194-196][19880701:0000]{Science and Stupidity}[1st July 1988],] 194)}

#No, no, see VI.[] 255! (– at J~-G~-R~) <891010>

[PostedBlogger10062018]