Paper Short Abstract:

This paper will challenge the language of past and contemporary discourse on the topic of extraordinary experiences, highlighting the negative impact it can have on contributor-researcher relationships, and discuss more inclusive terminology that can be used both in and out of interview contexts.

Paper Abstract:

This paper addresses the language surrounding the discourse of extraordinary experiences, challenging the conventional terminology used when discussing these experiences and offering alternative language with which researchers can use to describe and engage with the data. The current language surrounding this area of research can be clinical and sceptical, when in reality it should be open and seeking to understand, rather than pass judgment.

This paper will engage with the theme of Unwriting by engaging with past, scientific methodologies, and countering their ability to provide accurate data on human experience in the context of ethnology and folklore. It will then outline the researcher’s stance on subjective, connective, and reflexive research through semi-structured interviews and participant observation that go beyond the goal of the researcher and, using Elaine Lawless’s methodology, ‘engag[e] in dialogue and interpretation with other people who are engaged in dialogue and interpretation seeking meaning.’ (Lawless 1992)

Finally, this paper will challenge the belief that extraordinary experiences are less than rational by exploring the schism between Western, post-colonial, secular views of reality and pre-colonial belief and traditions. This challenge will also lead to an examination of researchers themselves, and an identification of factors that may, perhaps, dissuade researchers from pursuing this topic based on biases which may affect their findings, trust in researcher and contributor relationships, and the future of research on this topic moving forward.