On Constructivism in Philosophy of Mysticism

In the philosophy of mysticism, constructivism has become the dominant view, arguing that mystical experiences are shaped by the cultural and linguistic context of the experiencer, making unmediated experiences impossible. This paradigm has largely overtaken the earlier perennial philosophy, which held that all mystical experiences share a common core. Scholars such as Jess BryonHollenback, Francis X. Clooney, and Torben Hammersholt note that constructivism now represents the mainstream consensus, with Steven Katz's 1978 article on the topic considered a classic. The constructivist position undercuts claims that mystical experiences provide direct, veridical knowledge, and aligns with postmodern concerns for diversity and the rejection of unmediated experience.

Study at a glance

Abstract

A generation ago the big fight in the philosophy of mysticism was over constructivism versus perennial philosophy. And as Jess BryonHollenback notes, “the contextualist paradigm appears to have scored a resounding triumph over its essentialist predecessor.” Certainly, constructivism today is, as Francis X. Clooney says, the “mainstream consensus.” And as Torben Hammersholt points out, “if one were to point to a text that has attracted the most scholarly attention within the last thirty years of research on mysticism, [Steven Katz’s 1978 article on constructivism] would be a strong candidate. It is now a classic.” That constructivism undercuts the veridicality of mystical experiential claims has been recognized for decades, but its rejection of unmediated experiences as being impossible certainly fits better with the postmodern temperament of the day. Constructivism dovetails with the postmodern concern for diversity and the common postmodern claim that the