William James And Jason Blum's Explanation Of Radical Empiricism

1387 Words 6 Pages
Everyone has had an experience which has made them feel as it as irrational or unjustifiable. However, much of these experiences are looked at under doubtful examination, and have been explained to be logically justifiable and not at all mystical. Philosopher, William James (1910) explains these experiences and helps to understand them through his lecture on mysticism. His belief that no part of the experience should be left unexplored is what gained him a respectful popularity, James calls this radical empiricism (Hood 2002, p. 5) In his essay, Jason Blum (2015) contributes his interpretation of mysticism, more specifically radical empiricism, and how it can be used to understand a phenomenology of religion. The connection between James’s …show more content…
429). Phenomenology of religion has regularly stressed on the experience as the core for studying religion, compared to other approaches (Bum 2015, p. 435). James’s radical empiricism allows phenomenology of religion to better develop the experience by bringing certain dimensions into light that would not have been brought out in any other approach (Blum 2015, p. 424). Blum outlines fundamentals point in which radical and phenomenology of religion connect (Blum 2015, p. 425). The realization of the key emotions which has no order in the dimensions of the experience, and the importance of putting judgement in order to understand the experience as it is, and lastly. Radical empiricism gives phenomenology of religion a deeper means of identifying and examining “experiential dimensions” of religion, without fear of having to dismiss such dimensions (Blum 2015, p. 435). Blum (2015) points to the importance for researchers to include the quality of emotions in order to better reflect the subject and the characteristics of the experience (p. 437). Phenomenology of religion finds this to be importance, and radical empiricism supplies it with a guide to follow and identify these qualities (Blum 2015, p. 437). Radical empiricism …show more content…
439). By acknowledging these emotions, they were able to identify that the conversion was pushed by their emotions and not rational concerns, corroborating the use of a radical empirical phenomenological style (Blum 2015, p. 439). Another shared connection between the two, is the agnostic impression towards experienced objects as “ontologically” autonomous realities they both share (Blum 2015, p. 441). This essentially means that phenomenology of religions does not have a stance on the existence or non-existence of higher beings, supernatural beings, but instead it puts aside these sorts of question in order to concentrate on the experiential responses received from these questions (Blum 2015, p. 441). Similarly, for radical empiricism these questions do not hold a value, as James is not interested in this, but more on experience as well (Blum 2015, p. 442). Lastly, radical empiricism does not have any premediated thoughts and confines when analysing experiences (Bum 2015, p. 443). Again similarly, phenomenology of religion believes that any expectation before dissecting an experience is unnecessary, as the experience should be guided by whatever means to guide (Blum 2015, p. 443). In all, both radical empiricism and phenomenology ask that researchers

Related Documents