Scholarly discourse on meditation suffers from inconsistent terminology and a lack of agreed-upon definitions and categories. Past attempts to create new lexicons have been useful but remain debated and misinterpreted. This paper proposes two new models to improve scientific reliability. First, it suggests a taxonomic system based on the established third-person paradigm of Affect and Cognition, borrowed from psychology and cognitive science, rather than inventing new first-person terminology. Second, it offers a definitional model that distinguishes meditation method from meditative state, conceptualizing meditation as a dynamic process with six related stages. The goal is to provide researchers with a reliable nomenclature for categorizing meditation methods and a conceptual framework to guide research and theory.
A classification system for meditation methods, first proposed in 2013, is expanded into a Three Tier Classification System that accounts for the full range of meditation practices. The system uses functional essentialism and the affect-and-cognition paradigm to separate methods into three orthogonal categories. Recent neuroscience research is presented as validating the original thesis. The paper also introduces a criterion-based protocol for formulating such classification systems and demonstrates how this model can be used to compare and evaluate other taxonomy proposals published over the past 15 years.
The author argues that progress in consciousness research is hindered by imprecise language, conflated terminology, and a lack of operational definitions. A review of historical and current definitions reveals a plethora of overlapping concepts. The paper critiques the search for neural correlates of consciousness, calling for greater semantic clarity. It discusses whether consciousness should be understood as a process rather than a tangible thing located within the nervous system. Suggestions for improving discourse include adhering more strictly to operational definitions and reconsidering the conceptual foundations of the field.
The fMRI procedure itself—lying in a noisy, confined tube—alters both subjective experience and brain activity during Transcendental Meditation (TM), potentially confounding results from fMRI studies of meditation. Twenty-three TM practitioners (11 short-term, averaging 2.2 years; 12 long-term, averaging 34.8 years) underwent eyes-closed rest and TM practice in three conditions: sitting upright, lying supine, and lying inside a simulated fMRI tube with 110 dB recordings. During the simulated fMRI condition, participants reported shallower meditation and greater agitation. Skin conductance decreased least in that condition. Frontal and parietal EEG power decreased from sitting to simulated fMRI in alpha2 through gamma bands. The default mode network was more active during TM when sitting compared to the simulated fMRI condition.