scholarly journals Mysticism without concepts

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian Gäb
Keyword(s):  
Common Core ◽  
William James ◽  
Mental Content ◽  
Striking Similarity ◽  
Aldous Huxley ◽  
Nonconceptual Content ◽  
The Common ◽  
Per Se ◽  
Mystical Experiences ◽  
Words And Images

AbstractIt has often been claimed, e.g. by William James or Aldous Huxley, that mystical experiences across times and cultures exhibit a striking similarity. Even though the words and images we use to describe them are different, underneath the surface we find a common experiential core. Others have rejected this claim and argued that all experiences are intrinsically shaped by the mystics’ pre-existing religious concepts. Against these constructivist objections, I defend the idea of a common core by arguing that even if all experience is interpreted through concepts, there could still be a common core. Those who reject the common core thesis usually argue that no distinction between experience and interpretation can be made since all experience is per se already interpreted. The notion of an uninterpreted experience is self-defeating. Drawing on current research on nonconceptual mental content, I argue (a) that experiences can have nonconceptual content; (b) that interpretation must be understood as conceptualization and (c) that conceptualization presupposes a raw mental content that is not conceptualized. This raw content is not experienced as nonconceptual. Rather, the nonconceptual, uninterpreted common core is an abstraction which shows itself only through reflection. Thus, the existence of a common core is compatible with the fact that all experiences are interpreted.

The Common Core Thesis in the Study of Mysticism

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ralph W. Hood
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Common Core ◽  
Natural Science ◽  
William James ◽  
Mystical Experience ◽  
Aldous Huxley ◽  
Empirical Psychology ◽  
Faith Traditions ◽  
Or Practice ◽  
The Common

The common core thesis contends that mystical experience is an ultimate non-sensuous experience of unity of all things. It can be identified within major faith traditions, whether explicitly religious or not. Its roots are in the work of William James who explored mystical experience outside the limits imposed by what he perceived as only a provisional natural science assumption of the newly emerging discipline of empirical psychology. Following the explicit phenomenological work of Walter Stace, the phenomenology of a universal core to mystical experience has been operationalized and an explicit psychometric measure developed to allow empirical assessment of the claim to a common core to mysticism. It is the linkage of psychometric approaches to the work of James and Stace that is now known explicitly as the common core thesis. The common core thesis needs to be delineated from the perennialist thesis popularized by Aldous Huxley in which there is postulated not only a common core experience, but also values and practices claimed to be associated with this experience if not directly derived from it. Psychometric and empirical evidence for the common core thesis is substantial and continues to accumulate. The common core thesis is restricted to mystical experience and assumes that this experience seeks to express itself in various faith traditions, whether religious or not, but is not restricted to or defined adequately by the culture or language with which this experience is interpreted. Unlike the perennialist thesis, the common core thesis does not assume that any common theology, philosophy, or practice necessarily follows from mystical experience.

scholarly journals Modelling the reciprocal dynamics of dialogical communication: On the communication-philosophical undercurrent of radical constructivism and second-order cybernetics

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-55
Author(s):  
Peter Kastberg
Keyword(s):  
William James ◽  
Second Order ◽  
Mutual Understanding ◽  
Radical Constructivism ◽  
Founding Father ◽  
Free Communication ◽  
Basic Assumptions ◽  
The Common ◽  
Per Se ◽  
Alter Ego

Even though both Ernst von Glasersfeld, the founding father of radical constructivism, and his epistemological alter ego, Heinz von Foerster, one of the principal architects of second-order cybernetics, would both repeatedly stress the formative importance of communication, neither would ever model communication as a phenomenon per se. I will propose a first modelling of communication as seen through the stereoscopic lens of these two schools of thought. I will first present, discuss and evaluate how communication is traditionally modelled. This will serve as an informed backdrop when I proceed to integrate the common denominators pertaining to communication from relevant works of both scholars. In addition to the fact that both would willingly profess to the ‘Linguolaxis’ of Maturana and Varela, i.e., that humans exist suspended in communication, two basic assumptions have proven formative. Firstly, that communication is perceived as a flux, as an almost William-James-like ‘stream of communication’. Secondly, and this is more in the vein of Heraclitus, that both communicators and communication alike undergo transformations in the process of immersion. This implies favouring a view of communication in which communication is a perpetual oscillation between ongoing reciprocal perturbations (Glasersfeld), that occur over time, and the endeavours to re-establish (cognitive) homeostasis (Foerster). The latter must not be reduced to either mere compliance, as it were, i.e., that the ‘other’ does as s/he is told, or to the mutual understanding of a dominance-free communication of a Habermasian persuasion, but rather in the pragmatic notion of ‘compatibility’ (Glasersfeld). For illustrative purposes I will end this paper by translating these notions into a model depicting what I have labelled co-actional communication, in effect forging an exemplar.

scholarly journals Similar Differences

Axis Mundi ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Will D Simpson
Keyword(s):  
Common Core ◽  
Social Constructivist ◽  
Unresolved Issue ◽  
Constructivist View ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Common ◽  
Mystical Experiences ◽  
Cognitive Foundations ◽  
Area Of Study

The study of mystical experiences is an endeavor that has been approached in many ways. One unresolved issue in this area of study is whether or not there is a particular type of experience underlying the traditionally religious interpretations, which can be termed “mystical.” In this paper, the author posits that some of the foundational claims of the common core view and the social constructivist view of the nature of such experiences, respectively, are not completely incompatible. Rather, the two approaches may converge with regard to the cognitive foundations of cross-culturally accessible anomalous experiences.

scholarly journals Comparison of "mystical experience" from William James and Walter Stace' point of view with Rumi's view

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3C) ◽  
pp. 564-583
Author(s):  
Shirin Shokati Asl ◽  
Fatemeh Sheikhloovand ◽  
Mohammad Farahmand Sarabi ◽  
Azra Ghaffari
Keyword(s):  
William James ◽  
Mystical Experience ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The Common ◽  
Mystical Experiences

This paper recognizes Rumi's views on the subjects that constitute the nature of mystical experiences, which has been less considered by researchers and has provided evidence to test the theory of researchers such as William James and Walter Stace in the field of mystical experiences. First, some explanations about mystical experiences are presented, then, respectively, the common characteristics of mystical experiences from the perspective of James and Stace, and by summing up the opinions of these researchers, eight attributes have been considered for mystical experiences and finally compared with Rumi's verses, which have either confirmed the existence of that characteristic in Rumi's mystical experiences or have been silent about that characteristic or this. These verses have shown the opposite of the feature in question. In each of these stages, the summation of Rumi's general opinions about it has been done as much as possible.

O ENSINO RELIGIOSO EM QUESTÃO

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (21) ◽  
pp. 459
Author(s):  
Mauro Rocha Baptista
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Religious Education ◽  
Common Core ◽  
Historical Perspective ◽  
National Curriculum ◽  
The Other ◽  
Federal Constitution ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Common

Neste artigo analisamos a relação do Ensino Religioso com a sua evolução ao longo do contexto recente do Brasil para compreender a posição do Supremo Tribunal Federal ao considerar a possibilidade do Ensino Religioso confessional. Inicialmente apresentaremos a perspectiva legislativa criada com a constituição de 1988 e seus desdobramentos nas indicações curriculares. Neste contexto é frisado a intenção de incluir o Ensino Religioso na Base Nacional Curricular Comum, o que acabou não acontecendo. A tendência manifesta nas duas primeiras versões da BNCC era de um Ensino Religioso não-confessional. Uma tendência que demarcava a função do Ensino Religioso em debater a religião, mas que não permitia o direcionamento por uma vertente religioso qualquer. Esta posição se mostrava uma evolução da primeira perspectiva histórica mais associada à catequese confessional. Assim como também ultrapassava a interpretação posterior de um ecumenismo interconfessional, que mantinha a superioridade do cristianismo ante as demais religiões. Sendo assim, neste artigo, adotaremos o argumento de que a decisão do STF, de seis votos contra cinco, acaba retrocedendo ante o que nos parecia um caminho muito mais frutífero.Palavras-chave: Ensino Religioso. Supremo Tribunal Federal. Confessional. Interconfessional. Não-confessional.Abstract: On this article, we analyze the relation between Religious education and its evolution along the currently Brazilian context in order to understand the position of the Supreme Court in considering the possibility of a confessional Religious education. Firstly, we are going to present the legislative perspective created with the 1988 Federal Constitution and its impacts in the curricular lines. On this context it was highlighted the intention to include the Religious Education on the Common Core National Curriculum (CCNC), which did not really happened. The tendency manifested in the first two versions of the CCNC was of a non-confessional Religious Education. A tendency that delineated the function of the Religious Education as debating religion, but not giving direction on any religious side. This position was an evolution of the first historical perspective more associated to the confessional catechesis. It also went beyond the former interpretation of an inter-confessional ecumenism, which kept the superiority of the Christianity over the other religions. As such, in this paper we adopt the argument that the decision of the Supreme Court, of six votes against five, is a reversal of what seemed to be a much more productive path on the Religious Education.Keywords: Religious Education. Brazilian Supreme Court. Confessional. Inter-confessional. Non- confessional.Enviado: 23-01-2018 - Aprovado e publicado: 12-2018

The Problem of the Typology of Rationality in Muslim Culture

2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (6) ◽  
pp. 88-99
Author(s):  
Andrey A. Lukashev
Keyword(s):  
Modern Philosophy ◽  
Theoretical Basis ◽  
Theoretical Models ◽  
The Other ◽  
Common Denominator ◽  
Islamic Culture ◽  
The Common ◽  
Per Se ◽  
The One ◽  
Muslim Culture

The typology of rationality is one of major issues of modern philosophy. In an attempt to provide a typology to Oriental materials, a researcher faces additional problems. The diversity of the Orient as such poses a major challenge. When we say “Oriental,” we mean several cultures for which we cannot find a common denominator. The concept of “Orient” involves Arabic, Indian, Chinese, Turkish and other cultures, and the only thing they share is that they are “non-Western.” Moreover, even if we focus just on Islamic culture and look into rationality in this context, we have to deal with a conglomerate of various trends, which does not let us define, with full confidence, a common theoretical basis and treat them as a unity. Nevertheless, we have to go on trying to find common directions in thought development, so as to draw conclusions about types of rationality possible in Islamic culture. A basis for such a typology of rationality in the context of the Islamic world was recently suggested in A.V. Smirnov’s logic of sense theory. However, actual empiric material cannot always fit theoretical models, and the cases that do not fit the common scheme are interesting per se. On the one hand, examination of such cases gives an opportunity to specify certain provisions of the theory and, on the other hand, to define the limits of its applicability.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document