-
Expand entry
-
Added by: Petronella RandellAbstract:
David Lewis has argued that “having an experience is the best way or perhaps the only way, of coming to know what that experience is like”; when an experience is of a sufficiently new sort, mere science lessons are not enough. Developing this Lewisian line, L.A. Paul has suggested that some experiences are epistemically transformative. Until an individual has such an experience it remains epistemically inaccessible to her. No amount of stories and theories and testimony from others can teach her what it is like to have it, nor is she able to achieve this knowledge by way of imaginative projection. It’s this last claim that is the focus of this paper. In particular, I explore the case for the claim that some experiences are in principle imaginatively inaccessible to someone who has not undergone the experience itself or one relevantly similar. As I will suggest, this case is not as strong as is often thought. Close attention to the mechanisms of imagination, and in particular, to cases of skilled imaginers, suggests how techniques of imaginative scaffolding can sometimes be used to give us epistemic access to experiences we have not had, even ones that are radically different from any that we have had before. As a result, considerably fewer experiences remain imaginatively out of reach than proponents of transformative experience would have us believe. Experience may well be the best teacher, but this paper aims to show that imagination comes in a close second.
Comment: This paper would be an excellent essential or further reading for a week on transformative experiences, or challenges to Paul's concept of transformative experience. It could also be used in a module on the imagination in general, as the argument that the imagination is a skill which can be practiced (and is not as limited as most believe it to be) is interesting to engage with outside of the transformative experience debate.
-
Expand entry
-
Added by: Petronella Randell
Abstract: What happens when we consider transformative experiences from the perspective of gender transitions? In this paper I suggest that at least two insights emerge. First, trans* persons’ experiences of gender transitions show some limitations to L. A. Paul’s (2015) decision theoretic account of transformative decisions. This will involve exploring some of the phenomenology of coming to know that one is trans, and in coming to decide to transition. Second, what epistemological effects are there to undergoing a transformative experience? By connecting some experiences of gender transitions to feminist standpoint epistemology, I argue that radical changes in one’s identity and social location also radically affects one’s access to knowledge in ways not widely appreciated in contemporary epistemology.
Comment: This paper would work well as an additional reading on a week about transformative experience, particularly on a module which includes feminist philosophy. The paper argues that the choice to transition can be made rationally, despite this decision being a transformative decision.
-
Expand entry
-
Added by: Petronella Randell
Abstract: I want to focus on some of the limits of decision theory that are of interest to the philosophical concern with practical reasoning and rational choice. These limits should also be of interest to the social-scientists’ concern with Rational Choice.
Comment: Ullmann-Margalit's work on big decisions is a significant precursor to L.A. Paul's work on transformative experience. This paper introduces the idea of big decisions as a problem for decision theory, and would be suitable as the essential or further reading on a week discussing challenges to decision theory, rational choice, or on transformative experience.