On Constructivism in Philosophy of Mysticism
The Journal of Religion 2020 DOI: 10.1086/706155 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Topics | Mysticism |
| Citations | 14 |
| Key points | Argues that constructivism has become the mainstream consensus in the philosophy of mysticism, displacing the earlier perennialist or essentialist paradigm. |
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