For the last few years, I have been involved with an emerging academic field called Contemplative Studies (CS). CS includes both the standard “third person” study of contemplative traditions and actual “first person” practice of contemplative exercises as part of coursework. Aspects of CS have been controversial in certain quarters, seen by some as not completely compatible with the rigorous “critical inquiry” of liberal arts study. While there are agendas within CS which go beyond the traditional questions and issues of liberal education, my view is that CS has, for a number of reasons, a place right at the heart of such inquiry. CS is being utilized in many disciplines (including psychology, medicine, and neuroscience as well as literature and visual/fine/performing arts), and I would like to begin a conversation about CS at TCU. Yet to begin, and give a flavor of some issues in play, I will focus below on its place in liberal arts humanities generally, and Religious Studies specifically.
First, to briefly define some terms: “contemplation” refers to ways of knowing and focusing attention which include a wide variety of practices: sitting or walking meditation, yogic postures, reflective self-inquiry or nature observation, silent prayer and group chanting, visualization, and many others. “Liberal arts,” or liberal education, has many qualities and purposes, but ones most relevant here include: 1) reflective self-awareness, recognizing and critiquing one’s beliefs and assumptions, 2) respectful and empathetic understanding of others (what I call “mental migration” into other worldviews), 3) understanding that humans are socially and culturally conditioned, existing in and shaped by an historical context, and 4) learning about various ways of thinking or modes of inquiry.
CS clearly has the goals of enhancing both self-awareness and “mental migration” into other worldviews, and an expected outcome would be ongoing critical reflection on such learning. CS values the analytic study of contemplative states and traditions: scientifically, historically, culturally, and personally. While few would disagree that scientific inquiry, historical study, and knowledge of sociocultural context are significant in learning about contemplative traditions, there is more dispute about the value of actual “first person” practice of contemplative exercises both for scholars and for students in an academic course, during or outside of class. Recently, numerous scholars have eloquently argued that such first hand personal experience is one important way of illumining traditions and alternative ways of knowing and valuing (see, for example, Meditation and the Classroom, edited by Fran Grace and Judith Simmer-Brown, SUNY Press, 2011).
To make the case fully for contemplation in liberal education would take an extended essay. Here I’d like to simply offer a series of connected reasons why this view should resonate for a liberal arts teacher. Each is legitimate on its own, but gains power in relation to the others. 1) There are a variety of ways of knowing self/ consciousness and world, and it is important to investigate and understand these alternative ways. In fact, recognizing that there are different kinds of knowing increases one’s capacity for critical analysis. 2) One of the sources for comprehending the diverse ways of knowing (including contemplation) is contemplative reflection itself. 3) Contemplative inquiry has been important to many people in a large number of cultures (not just Asian) and a significant pattern in history, so it should be understood (through both study and practice) to gain a more accurate (and “lived”) understanding of others’ worldviews and practices. 4) Given this broad and long-standing interest, there are, naturally, diverse contemplative traditions and experiences. We should learn how this variety is understood and explained by “insider” practitioners (focusing on their first person significance) as well as by science (focusing on their third person nature). Relatedly, such study offers useful practice in “mental migration” into others’ worldviews. 5) Those within contemplative traditions have themselves long argued about and critically analyzed various introspective states, so we should learn about and attend to both the states and those arguments, 6) In evaluating what contemplative thinkers say, it is valuable to attend to what and how we ourselves experience, and to examine how we know what we know: again, we learn important things from both third person cognitive science and first person training in introspection. Obviously it is difficult to determine the degree to which one can “neutrally” observe and examine one’s consciousness. Such observation may be hard to do, and the investigator needs training, but one’s ability to both observe and analyze can be increased. 7) All the above bring attention to what and how we study, and illumine what issues and perspectives are important in different models of reality. Contemplative inquiry opens possibilities for critical thinking about both philosophical arguments and one’s own and others’ mental process and content. It further can challenge reigning paradigms, modern or post-modern, positivist or religiously sectarian. Finally, by opening alternative views of human being and flourishing, this study and practice offers new models and possibilities in thinking and being. Again, the above is simply a jumping off point for reflection and discussion.
This article was written by Andrew O. Fort, PhD, Religion Department, for the Spring 2012 Issue of Insights Magazine.