I’ve been suggesting that the basic constituents of experience are neither ideas nor representations but activities of thought capable of generating ideas and representations. On this view, it follows that perception is grounded in the actions of the person; it is a skill of combining the manifold of sensibility into the semantically hued diorama of meaningful experience that all people experience as they navigate the world. As a skill of perception, experience can be said to consist in various levels of detail and nuance; it is shot through with skillful means at the ground level, means trainable and plastic in nature. Indeed, if one takes the position that philosophy is an activity that intervenes upon the initial order of skilled perception, then it becomes clear that philosophy is a means for acting upon action. Philosophical practice on this view is itself something like a somatic or practical activity, one that makes contemplation—in the sense of marking out a space for observation—its own kind of skilled action, executed in an environment.
In other words, the philosophical standpoint affords a re-evaluation of the conceptual architecture and makes available a space for the re-fashioning of the synthetic processes of perception. (As I noted in my earlier post on Kant and Fichte, the key here really is the non-determined spontaneity of one’s understanding of a situation, the ability to act upon the sense made of phenomena.) Without this standpoint the shift enacted by acts of conceptual re-constitution can appear as an occult practice of making meaningful details and truths appear and disappear, and to the extent that a concept can yield new possibilities for action unavailable to the uninitiated, the description is apt without being literal. Certainly, the kind of action I’m pointing to here works mostly in limited and gradual ways, is always at risk of being derailed, and is always grounded in the ecology of the person. These are practices, after all.
In this context, I’m gaining a newfound appreciation for folks like Jay Garfield, Mark Siderits, and Evan Thompson. I’m also a little frustrated that there is such an obvious and interesting connection between the West’s transcendental tradition (not to mention its earlier traditions of Platonism, Aristotelianism, Stoicism, Epicureanism, and so on) and that of the Indian traditions that Garfield, Siderits, and Thompson engage, but there’s so little emphasis on the practice side of the Western tradition that I’m having to outsource my empirical curiosity about the strengths and limits of so-called transcendental abilities to the research happening on, for example, mindfulness meditation. Despite the outsourcing, the parallels with the Western tradition should be clear enough for folks with even a cursory understanding of the two streams. To be sure, it’s a new space I’m working to develop in future writing.
Knowledge Ecology 
do you mean so little emphasis by philos themselves cuz there is tons of research being done into skillful practices and expertise, just went to such a piano lecture the other day? maybe you could give a quick and dirty working definition of what makes an ability transcendental?
I actually appreciate that ET has come around to see the general divide between Indo/Buddhist theoreticians and meditators something my old prof Agehananda Bharati was pretty clear on, have you read any of his work?
LikeLiked by 1 person
No, not familiar with his work. But I was thinking more directly about mindfulness-style practices—I’m so out of my lane here that I won’t try to break them down by names or traditions—in the sense that you don’t see, at least I don’t, practicing phenomenologists or stoic philosophers or what have you being hooked up to fMRI machines and studied empirically the way Buddhist meditators are right now. Am I just wrong about that? I know there’s lots of literature on expertise in general, but I was thinking more specifically of what an empirical research program for transcendental philosophers, as opposed to mindfulness practitioners, would look like. Just as one example.
LikeLike
gotcha, well open field for you then, you might want to check with Alva and Evan to see if they know of any.
http://www.csp.org/chrestomathy/light_at.html
LikeLike
Have you looked at the MBCT-type angle on therapy? Or stuff like this:
https://www.routledge.com/Advances-in-Contemplative-Psychotherapy-Accelerating-Healing-and-Transformation/Loizzo-Neale-Wolf/p/book/9781138182400
Mostly hype, or?
LikeLike
haven’t seen but will check it out
LikeLike
can’t seem to find any scientific studies (do you know of any?) I’ve taught modified version of DBT with little to no success (no one does very well with “personality” disorders) when I worked in a state psychiatric unit, and I’ve provided crisis interventions/coverage for zen retreat centers and the like, some people crack, don’t know as much about the tibetan versions, imaging-practices and the like. “Mindfulness” in general seems mostly useful as the kinds of biofeedback training we provide folks with anxiety, migraines, etc, literally gives folks breathing room which is helpful but only in these limited ways. Would be interesting to see if tibetan practices like feeding demons) might bear some fruitful comparisons with exposure therapies.
LikeLike
Just a few, like this one:
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0109789
And then studies in the ongoing problem of quantifying in a meaningful way these types of activities:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886906000262
LikeLike
ah yeah pretty weak (“evidence” based isn’t actually science based but that’s a whole other tangent) but again that leaves much work for folks like you.
sometimes you ask me what role for philo and in part I think it comes here (as Alva often does) when we are trying to grasp what in particular are we trying to study/frame.
LikeLike
ah, Agehananda….the Ochre Robe and many other works….’On this view, it follows that perception is grounded in the actions of the person’. Presumably one person and not another…..?
LikeLike
that was him, funny brilliant fellow, got in a lot of trouble for bringing his western critical faculties to bear in debates with his religious peers but never let that stop him even here in the US he was cutting about fakers like Castaneda.
http://archives.syr.edu/collections/fac_staff/sua_bharati_a.htm
LikeLiked by 1 person
Click to access overgaard-gallagher-ramsc3b8y-proof.pdf
http://www.academia.edu/14182053/Gallagher_et_al._2015._A_Neurophenomenology_of_Awe_and_Wonder_Towards_a_Non-reductionist_Cognitive_Science
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on synthetic zerø and commented:
Adam Robbert extending his thoughts on human experience.
LikeLike