Abstract

Abstract.Some authors have described Niels Rohr as “never being open to anything transcendental.” Wolfgang Pauli, on the other hand, spent many years trying to persuade Bohr to admit to a kind of’ mysticism. This study offers support to Pauli's claims. First, a distinction between what is vague on the one hand, and what is necessarily circular on the other, clarifies the work of Bohr. This discussion leads to comments on Bohr's attitude towards the mutuality of spirit and matter and of reason and mysticism. Finally, some reflections are made about the relevance of Bohr's covert transcendental philosophy for theological endeavors.