Functionalism, Religion, Mysticism

While James conceives Functionalism as a principle of adjustment, Dewey distinguishes between adaptation to, and adaptation of, i. e. between self-modification, and modification of one's environment, as a response to a discordant situation.  That contrast, in turn, grounds for him an analogous opposition between Religion, e. g. deity-appeasement, and Technology, a contrast which tends to expose the Functionalist inferiority of the former.  Still, Dewey's version inherits from its predecessor the reduction of all behavior to a stabilizing process, thereby sharing with the Religion that it criticizes the premise that the human condition is inherently awry in some fundamental respect.  Accordingly, it cannot account for inverse processes, i. e. for de-stabilizing behavior.  Now, one type of de-stabilizing behavior is creativity, i. e. the introduction of novelty, one example of which, as has been previously discussed here, is mystical experience.  Thus, despite the more rigorous genealogy of Religion that Dewey's Functionalism offers, it can explain mystical experience no better than can James' version.