
“Religious intuition informs, conjoins, and transcends an otherwise fragmentary consciousness.”
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
“Religious intuition informs, conjoins, and transcends an otherwise fragmentary consciousness.”
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
On Truth and Lie in an Extra-Moral Sense (1873)
Context: There are ages in which the rational man and the intuitive man stand side by side, the one in fear of intuition, the other with scorn for abstraction. The latter is just as irrational as the former is inartistic. They both desire to rule over life: the former, by knowing how to meet his principle needs by means of foresight, prudence, and regularity; the latter, by disregarding these needs and, as an "overjoyed hero," counting as real only that life which has been disguised as illusion and beauty.
Speech delivered at Freemasons’ Hall, Great Queen Street, London, in a meeting held to constitute a Theistic Association in London on 20th July 1870. See Universal Religion for full speech.
“Intuition is a distinct form of experience.”
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Context: Intuition is a distinct form of experience. Intuition is of a self-certifying character (svatassiddha). It is sufficient and complete. It is self-established (svatasiddha), self-evidencing (svāsaṃvedya), and self-luminous (svayam-prakāsa). Intuition entails pure comprehension, entire significance, complete validity. It is both truth-filled and truth-bearing Intuition is its own cause and its own explanation. It is sovereign. Intuition is a positive feeling of calm and confidence, joy and strength. Intuition is profoundly satisfying. It is peace, power and joy.
Theater Games for the Classroom: A Teacher's Handbook (1986) Northwestern University Press, page 3
Friedrich Schlegel, Philosophical Fragments (1798)
S - Z
Source: Attributed in posthumous publications, Einstein and the Poet (1983), p. 103
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
“Religious experiences which are as real as life to some may be incomprehensible to others.”
United States v. Ballard, 322 U.S. 78 (1944)
Judicial opinions