Hyper–Kantianism in Recent Discussions of Mystical Experience
Religious Studies June 1, 1985 DOI: 10.1017/s0034412500017194 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Topics | Mystical experience |
| Key points | Argues that the debate over mystical experience turns on competing views of the experience-interpretation relation: the 'traditional view' associated with Stace, which supports the doctrine of unanimity, versus a 'hyper-Kantian' picture advanced by critics who see interpretation as shaping experience and who reject unanimity. |
Abstract
Much work on mystical experience has taken for granted a certain view about the relation between experience and its interpretation. This ‘traditional view’ has received perhaps its most explicit statement in Stace's Mysticism and Philosophy. It is a view which is attractive to proponents of the doctrine of unanimity, the doctrine (roughly put) that at the phenomenological level all mystical experiences are basically similar. Recently, however, in a growing body of literature, the traditional view has come under heavy fire. Its critics adopt a Kantian, indeed a hyper–Kantian, picture of experience. And they see the traditional view, accordingly, as ‘naïve’ and ‘simplistic’. In addition, hyper–Kantians typically reject the doctrine of unanimity.