I believe he is arguing against the sense of 'oneness'..

In The Emotion Machine, Marvin Minsky[214] argues that mystical experiences only seem profound and persuasive because the mind's critical faculties are relatively inactive during them:

Meditator: It suddenly seemed as if I was surrounded by an immensely powerful Presence. I felt that a Truth had been "revealed" to me that was far more important than anything else, and for which I needed no further evidence. But when later I tried to describe this to my friends, I found that I had nothing to say except how wonderful that experience was.

This peculiar type of mental state is sometimes called a "Mystical Experience" or "Rapture," "Ecstasy," or "Bliss." Some who undergo it call it "wonderful," but a better word might be "wonderless," because I suspect that such a state of mind may result from turning so many Critics off that one cannot find any flaws in it.

What might that "powerful Presence" represent? It is sometimes seen as a deity, but I suspect that it is likely to be a version of some early Imprimer that for years has been hiding inside your mind. In any case, such experiences can be dangerous—for some victims find them so compelling that they devote the rest of their lives to trying to get themselves back to that state again.

Minsky's idea of 'some early Imprimer hiding in the mind' was an echo of Freud's belief that mystical experience was essentially infantile and regressive, i.e., a memory of 'Oneness' with the mother.
------

Thoughts?

Maybe someone should explain to him the difference between the right and left hemispheres of the brain and point out the arrogance to takes to believe one is more authentic than the other.

I'm a huge fan of Minsky... everyone should read his book "Society of Mind," where he talks about breaking down the self into sub-agents.

I don't think Minsky necessarily means that all mystical experience is negative, just that you should note it and accept it on its own terms without necessarily believing in it. It's just like with any thought, emotion, or story the mind makes up: it's tempting to identify with it and believe it, but you can disidentify from it just by noting (anatta) and observing.

Regarding Freud's thoughts on mystical experiences being regressive, this is an example of what Ken Wilbur refers to as the "pre/trans fallacy," confusing pre-rational states with those that encompass and expand upon rationality.

I've experienced something that might be comparable.

I think it's a conditioned state, i.e. it arises in the presence of certain conditions, and doesn't arise in their absence.

I don't think it's a case of tapping into something separate. It's more like dreams, which arise from the same stuff that waking consciousness is made of, rather than being a different kind of consciousness, or a case of "wandering" consciousness. But there certainly are maps out there which propose a hierarchy of consciousness, "waking, dreaming, deep sleep" and so on, so this could be discussed in more depth.

To me, it's also an awe-inspiring state to enjoy. "Awe" in the King James sense. Awe as in "take off your shoes". Very compelling. If I were into devotion to a particular aspect of experience, this would be the first candidate.

It's been good to explore it and get to know it, see what it's made of, see what it is and isn't. Good for me, at least. YMMV.

So, has anyone else here experienced it themselves, or something comparable? Minsky's and Freud's views aside, what is your take on that state?

Cheers,
Florian

(edited to add remark about mapping)

PS: also, to anyone who experienced a mystical state - interested in discussing how you "got there"?