And the moment we renounce the absurd notion that a thing is exploded away as soon as it is classed with others, or its origin is shown; the moment we
agree to stand by experimental results and inner quality, in judging of values — who does not see that we are likely to ascertain the distinctive significance of religious melancholy and
happiness, or of religious trances, far better by comparing them as conscientiously as we can with other varieties of melancholy,
happiness, and trance,
than by refusing to consider their place in any more general series, and treating them as if they were outside of nature's order altogether?
When you first read about the «negative path» and Alan Watts's «backwards law» in chapter 1, did you find yourself
agreeing or disagreeing with Oliver Burkeman that these might be more sensible strategies for
happiness than positive thinking?