Methodological Problems of Essentialistic Definitions of the Concept "Mystical Experience »

The current situation in science is characterized by terminological pluralism, there are no clear formulations of the main religious terms (in particular, in the concept of religious and mystical experience).The article is devoted to the possibilities of defining the concept of “mystical experience”. The author fixes the situation of terminological pluralism in this question, different scientists give different definitions of this concept, there are any doubts whether this concept is empty. However, the article argues that “mystical experience” is a real phenomenon and is not an empty concept. In the article the author draws attention to the methodological difficulties faced by scientists in determining these concepts. Particular attention is paid to the problems of "essentialist" (aimed at understanding the "essence") definitions of mystical experience, their criticism by "contextualists" (S. Katz, W. Proudfoot, B. Garside), possible compromise solutions.
The article goes on to discuss three approaches to mystical experience – essentialist, contextualist and attributive. Based on a number of studies, the author describes the features of the essentialist (essential) approach, such as intuitiveness, irrationality, short duration, etc. Special attention is paid to the story of antinomy, because the experience needs to be expressed verbally. At the end of the article the author comes to the conclusion that it is necessary to combine essentialist and attributive approaches to the study of mystical experience.