Nathan Eckstrand is an editor at the Blog of the APA. The views expressed here are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the American Philosophical Association or the Blog of the APA.
Mystical experiences, or non-sensory awarenesses of situations that can’t be accessed normally, are incredibly diverse. They consist of encounters with God, eerie coincidences, feelings of connection with others, awarenesses of spirits, and insights into the world’s nature. Research on near-death experiences shows that mystical experiences can have a profound impact on someone’s life. People come away with a greater sense of purpose or connection to their world. But what is the epistemological status of such experiences? While clearly not scientific facts, are they subjective opinions? Is it reasonable for someone to believe them or the accounts of others? As the main character of Apple TV’s show Widow’s Bay, Tom Loftis deals with this question when confronted with the island’s mystic past, transforming from a skeptic to a believer. His transformation illustrates why it is reasonable, though not necessary, to believe that mystical experiences are true.
Widow’s Bay, named after the island town in which the show takes place, has no lack of mystical experiences. There’s a bell that rings nine times despite being chained up, a book that puts people into trances, and a demon that communicates with the town’s founder. While some supernatural phenomena are presented as empirical, others take place in characters’ minds. The latter qualify as mystical experiences. At the show’s beginning, Mayor Tom Loftis is skeptical about the townspeople’s claim that the town is cursed. He’s more interested in providing a positive experience for a visiting New York Times reporter. Loftis wants Widow’s Bay recognized as “the next Martha’s Vineyard and definitely not cursed,” which will bring more tourists. Of course, it doesn’t help that the local museum—which Loftis obligingly brings the reporter to—is decked out with exhibits about the island’s mysterious history, including references to a possible deal the town’s founder, Richard Warren, might have made with a demon. Yet Loftis dismisses these as local superstitions that he, as a mainlander, knows are absurd. In episode two, Loftis even stays a night in the local hotel to show townsfolk that it is not haunted.
Loftis’s rejection of local mysticism is a clear appeal to scientific realism. The locals only refer to legends to prove their claims of curses and demons, and Loftis finds this unreliable. He wants something he can confirm empirically; anything else is a rumor at best. Yet, even as he rejects the islanders’ superstitions, Loftis appeals to a constructivist view of mysticism to explain them. For him, the superstitious beliefs are part of the island’s culture. Similarly, Steven T. Katz claims that the content of mystical experiences is partly the result of one’s culture. Unlike those who believe all mystical experiences have a common core, Katz says that language, society, and psychology necessarily influence every mystical experience. As Katz’s goal is to explain the origins of such content, he—unlike Loftis—doesn’t question whether it is true. Nevertheless, Loftis draws on Katz’s insight. Loftis believes is the islanders’ similar culture that produces similar mystical experiences, rather than the similar experiences signaling that the superstitions are true. Loftis believes he has a more rational view, given his upbringing on the mainland.
Loftis changes his perspective on mysticism midway through the series when he accidentally takes psychedelic mushrooms, leading him on a drug trip in which—among other things—he recalls his wife going blind when she tried to leave the island. While the hallucinations are mostly comedic, it is true that psychedelics can create or enhance mystical experiences, and neurological studies confirm this relationship. Notably, Loftis’s hallucinations include a revelation confirming Warren’s pact with a demon and indicating that the only way to end the island’s curse is to end Warren’s family line.
Despite no scientific evidence to confirm his revelation, Loftis accepts it as true, indicating a shift in how he views mystical experiences. He begins to accept them, in part because he has had a mystical experience and in part because his experience matches the experiences of others. Loftis embraces what philosophers who study mystical experiences call the Doxastic Practice Approach. Doxastic means “of or relating to beliefs,” and advocates of this theory argue that the truth of one’s beliefs can be established, at least in part, by referring to one’s society. Specifically, supporters claim everyone evaluates and forms beliefs using socially established methods, and no method can justify itself without referring to itself (i.e., it is “epistemically circular”). Epistemologies should not be judged on whether they produce “Truth”—an impossible task—but on whether they are consistent. As long as one does not ignore cognitive or perceptual experiences indicating one’s epistemology is unreliable, one can use socially accepted practices to decide if something is true. For example, Christians can accept the truth of their mystical experiences by referencing Christian scriptures and doctrines. Since every epistemology is circular, there is no reason to privilege epistemologies like scientific realism over those that accept the existence of mystical experiences (assuming those other epistemologies are consistent).
In addition to providing a reason to accept that one’s mystical experiences are true, the Doxastic Practice Approach argues that we can sometimes accept the truth of others’ mystical experiences. This is because: (1) the experience itself argues for its existence, (2) if there is agreement between people in different times and places (e.g., people provide similar accounts of experiences with God), that implies the experience is not simply subjective, and (3) if the experiences have a positive effect upon a person’s life, that testifies to its truth. This last criterion, while perhaps unusual, comes from the pragmatism developed by William James. James says that mystical beliefs have greater truth value the more useful they are. As we can’t assess them scientifically, we should prefer mystical beliefs that lead to the best outcomes. While not arguing that mystical experiences are objectively true, James argues that these criteria provide reasons to accept the truth of both one’s own mystical experiences and those of others.
After his hallucinations, Loftis accepts the mysticism of the islanders. Even though the weird phenomena he’s experienced could be explained by other ideologies, Loftis looks for explanations using the island’s lore, as the Doxastic Practice Approach suggests. Among other examples, he searches the town’s museum to find Warren’s last descendant. Additionally, he accepts the truth of his revelation, not just because he’s had it but because it is confirmed by people throughout the town’s history who’ve had similar experiences. This is illustrated by his new interest in island lore, which describes others who, like Loftis’s wife, went blind after leaving the island. Most importantly, embracing the truth of his revelation leads Loftis to better outcomes. He realizes that to be a good mayor he needs to stop the troubles plaguing the island, and this requires him to accept the mystical experiences of the islanders as true. His improved outlook and actions testify to the truth of the island’s mystical experiences.
Loftis wrestles with the island’s mystical beliefs throughout Widow’s Bay. While initially dismissive, he comes to embrace them as important. By doing so, he effectively adopts the doxastic practices of the Widow’s Bay community, symbolically giving up his mainlander identity. Loftis transforms from a scientific realist who rejects the island’s mysticism to someone who embraces it using the Doxastic Practice Approach. As Loftis’s journey demonstrates, mystical experiences don’t need to be accepted as true by everyone, but that doesn’t mean we should reject them. There are legitimate reasons to believe that mystical experiences, whether encountered by us or others, are still true.
Nathan Eckstrand
Nathan Eckstrand is a professor at Sam Houston State University, where he’s worked since 2021. He previously served as editor-in-chief of the APA Blog, where he has worked since 2017. Nathan has published articles on Deleuze, Foucault, Fanon, and Said. His book,Liberating Revolution,was published in 2022.
