to say that in this prescriptive um case that we're making we're not making the case for mysticism mystical experiences or er everything that's called mystical experiences the whole you're making the case specifically for transformative higher states of consciousness is that so to curtail it if that's the case um is there then um is there then again begging the question where we're making the case for that which is transformative um on the ground that it is transformative and we're discluding any variation of it which is not transformative is there is there a problem there there might be a problem i i i i think i know what you're saying um i just want to make clear that i'm not doing quite that circle i'm trying to take seriously that people claim that these uh lead to transformation and and sorry i want to make some they justify making the transformations they've made so we have objective measures that they improve their lives but but and they justify it by saying i touch the really real and i want to touch it more so they justify the transformations undertaking the transformations in terms of the higher states of consciousness and in many ways you know the axial religions have that kind of move at them which is right you know um what justifies you doing all this is you will you will touch the really real in some fashion onto normativity so that's the thing that i'm that's the thing i'm specifically interested about do these experiences actually provide justification for the transformation that's a specific question i think we're asking so i'm not quite i don't see myself as quite doing that circle however i think there's a point you're making which is well aren't you just excluding all the wacky things i i don't know what adjective to use uh right that where they don't afford transformation and then part of what i want to say there is then i have to make a different kind of argument which is a historical argument which is you see and it's a plausibility argument you see convergence across cultures and across t