Skip to content

“What’s done is done, the bullet’s left the gun”: Questions on the Application, Origin, and Metaphysics of the «Course-of-Experience Framework»

Simon Høffding

Adaptive Behavior May 20, 2022 DOI: 10.1177/10597123221094356 (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Commentary Peer reviewed
Keywords Metaphysics Enactivism Semiotics Phenomenology philosophy Epistemology Neurophenomenology Lived experience Cognitive science Autopoiesis Psychoanalysis
Citations 3
Key points Argues that the Course-of-Experience framework is promising but has three potential shortcomings regarding comparison with similar methods, necessity of Peircean semiotics, and adoption of problematic assumptions from Micro-phenomenology.

Abstract

The Course-of-Experience presents an interesting method for working with others’ experience, drawing on Micro-phenomenology (MP), Enactivism, and Peircean semiotics. It addresses possible applications to cognitive science, answering to a call about how to reliably integrate phenomenological data and experimental methods. I applaud the ambitious framework presented in the target paper, and hope that Poizat and colleagues in response or in later work will address three potential shortcoming: (1) How does the framework fare in comparison to similar methods. (2) Why is Peircean semiotics necessary for the framework? 3) Does it need to copy what seems to be epistemological and metaphysical infelicities concerning pre-reflective experience directly from MP?

Citations in the library

Explore topics