The personal attacks here are cheap and unbecoming. Are you not a metaphysical monist? Do you not speak mystically about that monism, about reason being insufficient to know the truth, and so forth?
We had a long debate about this (link below), and frankly I found your responses cagey. Although this article is a short trifle, I think it puts its finger on an argument that underlies the key question I have for standard, traditional (as opposed to cosmicist) mystics or pantheists: why should the ideal mental state be marked by contentment and tranquility, and why should it motivate the person to act with compassion and benevolence?
Of course the mystic says we _can_ be selfish or selfless or that we can wallow in suffering or free ourselves from that state. I'm talking about the likely content of the higher state of mind. It's sold one way in mystical literature, perhaps to make it seem more inviting, but it may end up being less reassuring and uplifting.
The dubious aspect of cosmicism is self-evident since the negative aspect of the existential moods that would mark a transhuman or enlightened character are subversive. They threaten us with despair, depression, and insanity. That's why we resort to more tolerable reinterpretations. That's why we return to anthropomorphic religious myths. We prefer to live in humanized physical and mental environments.
