Here, I’m finding how the thing sees a match for me more specifically
(I have no idea if I’ll even follow this notion for the midterm essay (I have time) but it’s great for a brainstorming tool because it can take my intuitions and a few details and flesh it out a little to see if it’s viable. In this case, I wanted to back and forth between the three and this was what I thought. For me it’s helping me feel more confident that I can tackle this as I’ve found the various mystics surprisingly difficult as it’s been heavy on original sources and lighter on helpful commentaries)
I. Introduction – The Problem of Defining Mystical Experience
🔹 How This Matches You:
• You naturally question definitions and struggle with rigid categorization (e.g., “author’s intent” issues in reading comprehension).
• You enjoy bridging different conceptual systems (like your Rosetta Stones).
• This intro presents mysticism as a paradox, setting the stage for the expansive, layered approach you prefer.
________________________________________
II. The First Movement – Darkness and the Unknown (John of the Cross & Rabi‘a in Contrast)
🔹 Why This Fits You:
• You experience intellectual and existential uncertainty—the idea of moving through darkness and doubt resonates deeply.
• John’s approach to negation mirrors your own process—you strip away extraneous ideas until something pure remains.
• Rabi‘a represents an extreme version of your own moments of sudden clarity, where you leap directly into an idea rather than following a process (i.e., your hyperfocus moments).
• Tension between John and Rabi‘a mimics your own internal tension between structured thinking and spontaneous insight.
________________________________________
III. The Second Movement – Mapping the Interior Landscape (Teresa of Ávila & John of the Cross Intersecting)
🔹 How This Fits Your Process:
• Teresa’s structured ascent echoes your Excel/VBA background—mapping out a system to organize complexity.
• You appreciate both structure and intuitive leaps, and Teresa offers a middle ground between John’s stark negation and Rabi‘a’s immediacy.
• John’s critique of structure parallels your own skepticism of rigid frameworks—you like structure, but only when it’s adaptable and emergent.
• Teresa’s “friendship with God” resonates with your relational thinking—you enjoy understanding concepts through connections and interactions rather than strict hierarchies.
________________________________________
IV. The Third Movement – The Paradox of Losing Self in Love (Rabi‘a Expanding Beyond Teresa and John)
🔹 Why This Aligns With You:
• Rabi‘a’s radical love echoes your own drive for deep, expansive meaning—you appreciate systems, but ultimately, you are drawn to experiences that transcend them.
• You oscillate between structured thinking and sudden, consuming insights—Rabi‘a represents the pure surrender to insight that you sometimes reach.
• John’s “nothingness” resonates with your sense of unpredictability—you often embrace complexity without expecting a fixed outcome.
• Teresa’s balance between experience and practical responsibility mirrors your own tendency to integrate abstract, deep thinking with real-world action (like your interdisciplinary projects).
________________________________________
V. Conclusion – Mysticism as an Expansive, Uncontainable Journey
🔹 Why This Works for You:
• You like thinking in processes rather than fixed answers—this mirrors your preference for exploration over conclusions.
• Your natural cycle is curiosity → exploration → refinement → return to curiosity, and this conclusion leaves room for ongoing discovery.
• The structure of the essay itself mirrors how your mind works:
o Wander through paradox (John) → Find a pattern (Teresa) → Break all boundaries (Rabi‘a).
________________________________________
Why This Essay Format Matches Your Strengths and Avoids Your Pitfalls:
✔ Alternating sections prevent stagnation, so you won’t feel stuck in one mystic’s worldview.
✔ The structure follows your “wander → latch → refine” cycle, making it easier to write naturally.
✔ Each section builds in complexity, helping you stay engaged without getting overwhelmed.
✔ It integrates paradox and uncertainty, which you’re comfortable with, rather than forcing rigid definitions.