Impossible thinking embraces every religious experience that can or cannot be slotted into a theistic model, including entirely private and popular ones. All of this is on the comparativist’s table. Like the phenomenology of verticality, this refusal to distinguish between the popular and the elite, between the “authentic” and the “inauthentic,” between “religion” and “magic,” this intentional oddness, will function as one of our five pillars of impossible thinking in my conclusion. There simply is no impossible thinking without this whacky weirdness, this refusal to distinguish.
