Human Experience Process

International Journal of Parapsychology © 2000 Parapsychology Foundation, Inc.
Volume 11, Number 1, 69-111 ISSN: 0553-206X, New York, NY, USA
The Exceptional Human Experience Process:

A Preliminary Model with Exploratory Map
Suzanne V. Brown
Exceptional Human Experience Network
In the early 1990s, Rhea A. White began extensive formal develop-

ment and documentation of her comprehensive theory of Exceptional
Human Experience (EHE). Consistent throughout her theoretical de-
velopment, literature review, and prodigious number of scholarly articles
and documentation is White’s (1990; 1997e; 1998a) centralizing focus
that anomalous or Exceptional Experiences (EEs) have the potential to
be experienced and subsequently integrated into new personal and world
view contexts. At these points of catalytic transpersonal insight —
where/when the event is no longer apprehended as separate from the
experience of the event and the experiencer realizes that he or she is
wholly integral to the creation and resolution of the EE — the experience
is potentiated, transmuted, and humanized, and becomes an Exceptional
Human Experience (EHE). Likewise in parallel, the EEer and EHEer
serve as broad categories of individuals who have engaged the EHE
process. Yet the key difference between them is that the EHEer has also
potentiated (acted upon) the experience, and in the process of potentiat-
ing and transmuting it “out there,” experiencers themselves have been
transformed in some personally-meaningful way “in here.”
Portions of this paper were presented as a poster session and invited workshop, with
Rhea A. White at “Tucson III: Toward a Science of Consciousness” in April, 1998. I
would like to thank Steven Rosen, Jenny Wade, and Rhea White for their most helpful
suggestions on an earlier draft of this essay; and Carlos Alvarado, Fred Gurzi, Ed
Pickens, Dick Richardson, Steve Rosen, and Charles Tart for their careful review and
stimulating comments that served greatly to enrich this publication. As always, I am
indebted to Rhea for sharing her courageous vision with me over the years. Please
address correspondence to Dr. Suzanne V. Brown, at 5801 Ganymede Place, Charlotte,
North Carolina, 28227, USA, or via email at drsbrown@concentric.net.
70 v IJP, Volume 11, Number 1
White’s general EHE theory is far-reaching in scope and thus spans
and interacts with several fields of academic endeavor, most notably
transpersonal psychology, and she is currently enjoying some degree of
recognition. Yet the EHE theory is rooted in the field of parapsychology,
a field in which White first ventured to better understand her own
near-death experience. This experience occurred in 1952 and catapulted
her directly into the experiential paradigm of the EHEer and back to the
difficult work of finding answers to questions raised by the experience
(White, 1997d). She took her questions to parapsychology because she
noted that anomalous perceptions similar to those of her own direct
experience were being investigated by those academic researchers. She
apprenticed, and later mentored, in the field, being directly involved with
the field for over 35 years.1 During that time, however, she came no
closer to answers to the questions that had brought her there in the first
place. Instead, the engine that came to drive research parapsychology
had limited its range and influence over the years, and by the mid-1980s,
centered almost exclusively on methodological issues, event-centered
proofs, and the investigation of truth-claims. The experiencers — and
the sheer variety of their types of experiences — had been left on the
sidelines to fend for themselves.2
This gathering insight kindled and fused to become a critical juncture
for White. It marked a crossroads, a pivotal point, in her own EHE
process. It was at this point that she founded the EHE Network in 1995.
The Network was designed to offer a centralized vehicle for experiences
and scholars alike to report and discuss their findings about exceptional
experiences, exceptional human experiences, and their aftereffects.
The central message of the EHE Network was that by going beyond
the phenomenological, event-centered issues into questions of personal
meaningfulness of the whole experience (before, during, after), experi-
encers could become more aware of who they are, and the “More” they
can be. Thus, White set out to uncover new insights as reported by actual
experiencers rather than taking the word, words, and professional inter-
1. Exceptional Human Experience (EHE) theoretical and background materials can be

ordered directly from Rhea A. White, Executive Director, EHE Network, 414 Rock-
ledge Road, New Bern, North Carolina, 28562, USA. Additional information and
resources are available on the Network’s website, www.ehe.org.
2. Some examples of types of EEs (potential EHEs): (Psychical) precognitive dream,
clairvoyant vision, telepathy, out-of-body experience; (Mystical) ecstatic bliss, cosmic
consciousness, outer space experience, religious conversion; (Death-related) near-death
experience, haunting, apparition, past life recall; (Encounter) UFO/alien, shrine/power
place, ancestor; (Enhanced) in the sports zone, nostalgia, déjà vu, reverie, falling-in-love,
remarkable coincidence.
The Exceptional Human Experience Process v 71
pretations of third-party researcher and case worker reports. A subtle
difference of methodological focus perhaps, but one that would lead
White and those of us who work with her to uncover fresh perspectives
about a wide range of EEs/EHEs and to raise questions once more about
the nature of reality and the cultural definition of the word “anomaly.”
In the process, we would come to learn that within first-person written
narrative essays rested whole patterns of defining characteristics, attribu-
tive factors, and transformational dynamics of both EEs and EHEs.3
Many sets of EHE qualities extracted from experiencer narratives
have been classified and codified. They continue to be updated by White
for use across a number of projects (White, 1994; 1997d; 1997f; 1999;
White & Brown, 1997). She was the first to classify and document
preliminary lists of triggers, concomitants, and aftereffects (TCAs) that
surround direct (exceptional) experiences. In addition, other researchers’
studies have been incorporated into these lists with references that
highlight vertical, in-depth attributes of one or more particular type of
EE and EHE (e.g., out-of-body experience, near-death experience, UFO
encounter, cosmic consciousness, sports zone). These published lists and
classifications and her continuing work to abstract and provide refer-
ences across tangential fields of EHE are most notable in Part II of her
journal, Exceptional Human Experience. These publications have provided
students, scholars, academic researchers, and libraries with a central
information resource for extending interdisciplinary study, and for com-
paring attributive features across the different types of EEs/EHEs,
including those studied by parapsychologists.
White’s pioneering efforts to span and classify all types of EE/EHE
originally yielded five classes (i.e., psychical, mystical, encounter, death-
related, and enhanced “normal”) complete with respective sets of defin-
ing characteristics, and well over one hundred nominal types of EE
(potential EHE).4 In addition, we had extended the TCA lists to include
longer spans of time surrounding direct experience, and to correspond
with, and capture greater detail from, lengthier, more retrospective,
self-reflective narratives which report suspected precursor triggers and
residual long-term aftereffects. As such, and with findings gleaned from
a labor-intensive exploratory research project, we have uncovered thus
far a total of 678 triggers, physical, physiological, psychological, and
3. Many thanks to Dr. Alexander Imich for sponsoring his essay contests in conjunction
with Rhea White and EHE Network over the years. His contests have helped greatly
to gather quality reflective, detailed narratives of EEs and EHEs.
4. White has revised some of these classes in 1999 to add two new ones, and will be
describing them in various publications in 2000.
spiritual concomitants, and their aftereffects (Brown & White, 1997).
Together, these qualitative TCA data, first observed and then later
extracted in analytical detail from scores of narrative reports, were
synthesized across potential classes of defining characteristics and further
classified into type. In essence, the experiencer narratives with their
embedded attributive characteristics form the original structural base of
EHE theory and the body of our early work.
For many hard-core parapsychologists, emphasis on experience
rather than on proving and/or modeling staged (laboratory or field)
events will still hold no luster. Too, the inclusion of a wide range of
anomalies (perceived anomalies) such as déjà vu, serendipity, encounters
with otherworldly “aliens,” sacred places, and things that go bump in the
night, “peak” mystical experiences, and even precognitive psi when it
holds only pieces of a puzzle to solve (rather than researcher-required
elements), can easily be dismissed as out-of-range to the proper focus
and current methods of parapsychology. As such, the baby continues to
be thrown out with the bath water, and admittedly, counting, recounting,
and defending counts of a particular type of baby’s toes over several
decades brings us no closer to understanding the baby as a whole living
system, nor to discovering the environmental (contextual, related) fac-
tors vitally important to its overall health and potential for a thriving
development.
On the other hand, hard-core experimental psychologists (I was
trained in the behaviorist tradition) summarily dismiss the notion that
there even is a baby to study. Exceptional experiences, part and parcel of
any type, belong to the realm of clinical study, or in the hands of those
“other” soft-core psychologists across the great divide who may be able
to “help” the experiencers when confronted with aberrations of faulty
learning, inaccurate perception, and non-rational cognition. Instead,
research samples are selected from homogeneous populations of “nor-
mal” college students (ages 19-22) to ensure minimal statistical variance
or error, and to maximize potential for the replication of “positive”
results across similar colleges and norms.
On the other side of the great divide of psychology are the majority
of developmental, existential, humanist, and transpersonal psychologists
who do consider the living health and well being of the baby and
recognize the qualities of the bath water as essential to overall develop-
ment. Yet, for many of these psychologists the baby under study follows
a predictable “normal” developmental life span, peppered with recog-
nized and recognizable perceptual-cognitive shifts, existential life-crises,
and adaptation to mainstream consensual values, truths, and realities.
This leaves little room for EEers/EHEers who consider themselves
“normal,” are recognized as “normal” by family, friends, and colleagues,
and who perform, on a daily basis “normally.” Yet, these perceptions,
even whole paradigm shifts of cognition, and the experiential crises they
can engender are likely to be initially depotentiated (i.e., ignored, dis-
missed, rationalized, forgotten) by experiencers and society at large. If
or when they are recognized and questions are raised, then expert
authorities entrained in contemporary cultural, consensual, common
values typically can offer a variety of resources specifically designed to
adapt experiencers back into the fold.
Needless to say the illustrations above are caricatures of worn stereo-
types (as are sensationalist media portrayals of most EEers and EHEers)
and the baby-bath metaphor is an overused cliché. However, if I caught
your attention then the illustrations will have been well worth the
editorial space. The sad truth is that most scholars consider their field
the only field of valid knowledge and have drawn ever-tighter circles
around acceptable content, methods, and hypothesis testing to serve as
representations of that field. A maturing field may divide several times
over its history (e.g., psychology currently includes over 100 recognized
branches as defined by the American Psychological Association) and that
is taken as a sign of growth and prosperity. Most scholars lose sight of
their originating roots (philosophy, including all inquiries of science and
religion) in the zeal to define the boundaries of a field’s territory and
branches. At some point we (as individuals and as a culture) reach a
critical juncture: Do we continue to fragment, erect rigid boundaries,
and increase the number of partitions in ever-tightening attempts at
analyses, or do we begin to (re)connect, allow “fuzzy” boundaries, and
to communicate across disciplines in ever-opening attempts at synthesis?
Or (there is always another “or” to consider when we begin to triangulate
either/or into both/and options) do we search to discover and receive the
insight of a novel perspective? One that honors both analysis and
synthesis — a cross-pollination of fresh seeds of information — one
firmly grounded in trial and error “facts” in order to create and produce
hybrids of alternative hypotheses, methods, possible new vistas to ex-
plore?
This was the dilemma presented to White when she ventured out
(and inward) to create and then formalize her own solution — the theory
of EHE, and the establishment of the EHE Network as a vehicle to
express EHE theory. Her story is an exemplar of the overarching EHE
process. It always begins with an EE of some type, and in some sensa-
tional cases these are spontaneously transmuted to EHEs, as hers was.
Yet, the transmutation of EE to EHE, and the dramatic transformative
shift of world and life view that it may instigate (i.e., engender the
experiential paradigm) is only one key part of the whole of the longitu-
dinal EHE process.
Too many people are having too many experiences that fall outside
the statistically-generated Bell Curves that depict and illustrate the
“norms” of everyday life experience. Both personal and cultural defini-
tions of reality (that is, personal experience nested within cultural expe-
rience) are limited and insufficient to capture the unique predicament of
the EEer and the EHEer. Yet, it is these very exceptions to the rule that
open new paradigms and, if potentiated, add remarkably to the quality
of life. Exceptional human experiencers, one by one, are discovering the
value of quality as well as the quantitative rule (ruler) that reveres and
venerates safety in numbers alone. This marking of renewed balance
between qualitative and quantitative experience is best measured in the
words of experiencers who have repeatedly visualized, in one form or
another, a new dawning of conscious awareness — an evolution of
humankind, so to speak. Based on these individuals’ symphonic notes,
the collected (and collective) words have been shared, analyzed, and
synthesized across individual narrative accounts. As such, they provide a
source of real-life human exploration, highlighting and underscoring the
insights and discoveries of EHEers and the evolutionary process of EHE.
This paper presents an integrated, dynamic synthesis of findings gath-
ered across EEer and EHEer reports. It is a map of the largely- uncharted
territory of anomalous worlds as they have been experienced, uncovered,
and of the conclusions drawn by individual explorers, as described in
their own words.
The EHE process is but one cornerstone of overall EHE theory.
White first discussed the possibility of a progressive, developmental
process unique to EHEers in 1993 (White, 1998a). Soon after submitting
my own essay narrative at the end of 1994 (Brown, 1995), I joined the
EHE Network to first assist in refereeing a variety of journal papers, and
soon after to become a contributing editor for the “Synchronicity
Connection,” a featured column of EHE News. After talking with scores
of friends and colleagues over the previous two to three decades about
our experiences (typically shared in confidential secrecy), I began corre-
sponding in earnest in 1995 with experiencers around the globe using
the technological miracle of Internet e-mail. These more casual email
discussions, together with the large number of the EHE Network’s more
formal narrative reports I had read by 1996, and with my own experience
of over four decades of EEs and EHEs, I could no longer deny these
experiencers nor their experiences, nor continue to try to rationalize my
own away. I volunteered for the post of the EHE Network’s Director of
Research and Development, offering my collective background in hu-
man information processing, experimental psychology, motivation, and
individual differences (personality) studies, and as an EHEer. From the
beginning, the EHE process with its inherent dynamic flow as evidenced
by the narrative reports I had read, and its implied multidimensional,
interweaving puzzle captured my attention. It was a personal challenge
for me, both as a researcher and as an experiencer. How were we to bridge
the gap between our ineffable experiences (including “simple” creative
insight) and the formal logic/feedback flow of sensation-perception-cog-
nition processing that allows little or no variance in interpretation?
As White had already determined by exploring and adopting methods
from transpersonal psychology, field anthropology, and interdisciplinary
studies, a solution for this puzzle might best be pieced together by close
inspection of the data submitted by the experiencer “introspective re-
searchers” themselves. For those readers who recall the origins of West-
ern experimental psychology, both classical perception and
psychophysics began with researchers from adjacent academic fields
using introspective methods to formulate null hypotheses (Boring, 1957;
Peters, 1965). In fact, almost all innovations in science and technology,
the arts and humanities begin with an EEer’s insight. This fact did not
escape us in our early discussions regarding the relative value of intro-
spective and retrospective reports (Brown, 1997b; White, 1998b).
Using this rationale, each narrative report is viewed as a research
(case) study onto itself with the experimenter and the experiencer being
one and the same. Introspective analysis and retrospective synthesis (i.e.,
“Tell us what happened in your own words, what did the experience[s]
mean to you?”) are methods of a lost science, perhaps, but also of a lost
art. White quickly learned that experiencers wanted, even craved to tell
their own stories in their own words — often divulging for the first time
in their lives to another human being one or more experiences which
may have laid fallow for years, even decades. Because experiencers were
further challenged to view their experiences in the context of personal
meaningfulness, more often than not, simply dwelling on this task alone
would fuse the direct experience, thus catalyzing and sparking far-rang-
ing new insights (Brown, 1997c; 1997d; White, 1997b). In contrast to
amassing narratives that simply recount the facts of direct exceptional
experiences, the EHE Network’s introspective-retrospective method
often enlivens and revitalizes the relatively flat, dormant event experience
into the dimension of meaningful experience. Importantly, for both
researchers and experiencers, direct experiences could thus be viewed
differently, no longer perceived as existing solely in a vacuum, where each
represented an independent stand-alone (statistical point or case) event,
or a collection of similar events.5 Instead, these direct experiences when
5. See also Eugene Gendlin (1997); or check his website, http://www.focusing.org, for
substantial efforts to define and apply a “first person science of meaning.”
we take them at face value “exist” within whole human contexts, includ-
ing baselines which mark life streams of steady state everyday experiences
(i.e., the experiencer-defined status quo) for which we could then begin
to define a relative Ground Zero.
Mature disciplines of science already have their methods, procedures
and preferences for testing and analyses well entrenched. But EHE
theory, including the subject matter of EEs and EHEs, and gathering
pieces of a huge puzzle called anomalous experiences (labeled as such by
both experiencers and Western culture) had virtually no precedent in
research, or in interdisciplinary, collective, cohesive scholarship. For our
exploratory research with EHEs it was vitally important to see first just
what we were dealing with before jumping to any a priori conclusions
based on preferred procedures, comfortable research methodologies, or
experimenter expectations for the data and how they should work.
Evolution of the EHE Process Model

Based on our early reviews of narrative essays, we learned that not
only did they cover a wide range of types of exceptional experiences, they
also covered varying spans of time between apprehending the initial
direct experience and the submission of the written report. Essays could
represent spans of (hypothetical processing) time that ranged from
several days to several years to many decades. To set the stage for the
possibility of capturing an EHE process in any detailed examination of
narrative reports, White offered an outline of five graduated develop-
mental (evolving) stages for us to consider, including descriptive titles
and prevalent themes based on longitudinal patterns she recognized as
universal across EHEer essays and from reflection into her own EHE
process evolvement over the years.6 Together we adopted her outline,
discussed it at length, and subsequently published a pair of complemen-
tary papers in which we compared and contrasted both the subjective
(White, 1997a) and the objective (Brown, 1997a) viewpoints for the EHE
process. The five stages were designated in ascending order:
6. As White describes her original epiphany of the EHE process: “[T]he idea was based
on my reading of 139 essays submitted to the 1994 Imich contest in a brief period of
time so that I was able to catch the drift of the overall pattern as well as [confirm it within
myself because] I had already begun to own and live from my own experiences since
1993, and observe what happened as a result. I was completely surprised. … [it] was
totally unexpected, not rationally anticipated [or derived].” (White, personal commu-
nication, December, 1999.)
1. The initiating event/experience
2. Search for reconciliation
3. Between two worlds
4. In the experiential paradigm
5. A new way of being in the world.
By initially designating five hypothetical stages and outlining their

prevailing themes, we literally set the stage for ourselves to begin to
examine and extract distinguishing characteristics representative for each
of the stages. Thus, during our 1998 exploratory research project spon-
sored by the Institute of Noetic Sciences (IONS), we chose to extract
several variables in addition to those direct experience TCAs specifically
requested by IONS (Brown & White, 1997).7 We noted that, for selected
variables pertaining to time spans and acknowledged history of previous
EEs/EHEs, experiencers’ introspective-retrospective emphasis seems to
shift remarkably. For example, those experiencers who reported rela-
tively-shorter spans (less than 12 months) tended to focus more on the
immediacy of the direct experience, detailing concomitant descriptive
characteristics and short-term residual aftereffects. Those reporting
progressively-longer spans shed light on the experience as it is nested
within a dynamic (human life) context, including shifts of TCA perspec-
tive toward long-term aftereffects and more inferences of personal
meaningfulness. Close examination of these additional data sets, none-
theless, did seem to support our preliminary hypothesis of an overarching
EHE process, and suggest that experiencers’ apprehension, perception,
and response to the originating EE do indeed shift over the time span,
and with type and number of experiences.
Although we implicitly understood, and had learned from reading
some of the more “advanced” EHEer reports, that the EHE process was
not necessarily limited to these five stages and could otherwise be
extended out in a linear series, these five stages were sufficient to capture
key qualities of the process. Specifically, the basic model was designed to
capture the transmutation of EE to EHE with emphasis on how these
experiences can, and do, shift perspectives (e.g., paradigms), and redirect
lives when they are potentiated. We also learned that advanced EHEer
(longitudinal, retrospective, contextual, autobiographical EHE) reports
7. Several additional variables were extracted for potential further analysis and publica-
tion including: experiencer’s age, span of time between experience and submitting essay,
changes in occupation, religion/beliefs, lifestyle; writer’s tone; process stage before/af-
ter; and class/type defining characteristics.
were few and far between when compared to the inordinate number of
single experience EE/EHE accounts that the EHE Network had re-
ceived over the years. At that point we surmised that advanced EHEers
were simply getting on with the business of Stage 5 (i.e., a new way of
being in the world) and did not have the desire to necessarily talk about
it nor explain to others how an initial EE got them “there” in the first
place. To do so would mean writing a full EHE autobiography describing
several or many EHEs over a life time and tying these together in some
personally-meaningful way, typically called the EHEer’s “calling” and its
longitudinal import (see White, 1997c). These essays can be massive
undertakings for EHEers, and yet anyone who has written an EHE
autobiography will tell you, the creative formulation effort in itself is a
richly-rewarding experience packed with additional insights often en-
gendering new EHEs (Brown, 1995). We also understood that the
various modes of expression, including the language, symbols, and
metaphors used by EHEers are not easily translated to non-EHEers (that
is, to those who have not at least once visited Stage 4 in the experiential
paradigm).8 For the purposes of sharing our initial findings with other
scholars and experiencers, five stages were sufficient to communicate the
dynamics of a potentiated EHE, including gradations of experiencer-
perceived shifts of conscious awareness and some of the more prominent
characteristics of subjective meaningfulness and objective behaviors. The
original 5-stage model continues to serve well as a columnar backbone
for a general developmental EHE process. Yet, for anyone who has
studied EHE narratives in any scope and depth, it becomes apparent that
within each of the stages there are qualitative sets of attributive charac-
teristics that could be used to distinguish (more or less) one stage from
the others.9 I subsequently attempted to capture, identify, and label some
of those characteristic qualities.
8. See Wade, 1996, and Rosen, 1994, 1997, for examples of extraordinary efforts of
EHEers to express the experiential paradigm and its perennial philosophy over the ages
and across cultures.
9. In any dynamic process “something” shifts. That “something” is different in some
way (i. e., some form) at each stage of a series of (progressive) developments over
perceived time, and yet also that “something” stays the same at its core descriptive level
and can be used to compare and contrast dynamic shifts of form across the stages. For
example: The cake in the box is also perceived as (the same, yet somehow different) cake
in the mixing bowl, the cake baking in the oven, the cake served, the one tasted and
enjoyed for dessert. In essence, we could say that a label “cake” is the lowest common
qualititative denominator that dynamically changes in form over time and can still be
called “the same yet different cake.” In questioning what “something ” is shifting along
the stages of the EHE process, we could answer “the experiencer” is. In questioning
how experiencers dynamically change, we can only surmise the “facts” by nature of
In selecting qualifier labels, it was important to identify not only sets
of particularly distinctive and distinct qualities, but also to arrange them
such that they suggest the approximate dynamic progression of those
qualities — from first entry to stated awareness — within a hypothetical
stage. Further, the labels selected should be generic enough to serve for
simple comparison and contrast of sets of characteristics across the
stages. To this end, the original five-stage model was expanded ortho-
gonally to include twelve classifiers common across stages. The result
was a 5-column by 12-row matrix model design structure into which I
could then begin to map key characteristics for each of the 60 resultant
cells. The twelve qualifier labels selected are:
1. Definition — A synthesized description of the stage gleaned from

the experiencers’ point of view;
2. Examples — Keywords, activities, and experiencer descriptions
which help clarify definition;
3. Search focus — Key questions transmuted to the experiencer’s
“search for X”;
4. Questions asked — Common questions voicing fears, speculation,
wonder;
5. Cognitive dissonance — The dilemma between old and new per-
spectives (worlds) which need to be resolved;
6. Depotentiating activities — Behaviors, choices that may impede, or
thwart the process;
7. Results of depotentiation — Common aftereffects when the process
is frustrated, or thwarted;
8. Potentiating activities — Behaviors, choices that serve to facilitate,
or enhance the process;
9. Results of potentiation — Common aftereffects when the process is
facilitated;
10. Challenges — Common pitfalls, perceived risks, new dilemmas
encountered which need to be resolved;
11. Critical juncture — Pivotal point, fusion of choice and insight to
gain novel realization;
12. Crossroads to next stage — New level of conscious awareness
realized, clearly reported.
experiencers’ stated aftereffects (their tracks) gleaned from report essays.

In the next section, I present the expanded EHE process model and
a detailed mapping of characteristic features gleaned from experiencer
narratives for each of the 60 matrix cells.
A Matrix Model of the EHE Process

with Characteristic Map
Stage 1: The Initiating Event/Experience

Definition: The initial, originating Exceptional Experience (EE) is of
sufficient strength or potency to capture the individual’s attention and
disrupt the status quo of everyday life activities. The EE may be one of
over 100 types reported by experiencers and initiated by one or more of
a variety of physical, physiological, psychological, or spiritual (i.e., intan-
gible) anomalous phenomenological events. EEs are classified as either
psychical, mystical, death-related, encounter, or enhanced.
Examples: (Psychical) precognitive dream, telepathy, out-of-body ex-
perience; (Mystical) ecstatic bliss, cosmic consciousness, conversion;
(Death-related) near-death experience, haunting, past life recall; (En-
counter) UFO, ancestor, shrine/power place; (Enhanced) in the sports
zone, nostalgia, déjà vu.
Search focus: Meaning of the EE.
Questions asked: What just happened? How can I explain this? Am I
crazy? possessed? losing touch with reality? Who can help me under-
stand?
Cognitive dissonance: The EE resides outside of the individual’s every-
day life view or belief structure; temporarily (typically from a few seconds
to a few hours, rarely more than a day) the EEer shifts his or her
attentional focus away from baseline/steady state of conscious awareness
and the status quo is disrupted.
Depotentiating activities: Exercising one or several forms of defense
mechanisms: denial, repression, rationalization, projection, and so on, in
which the experience and its inherent conflict may be consciously
ignored, mitigated, explained or laughed away. Rigid compartmentaliz-
ing of life and activities in an effort to revert to pre-experience order and
status quo; choices viewed as either/or, reality as black or white. Other
experiencers and their experiences may be ridiculed with vehemence.
Results of Depotentiation: The EEer shuts down to experience.
Potentiating activities: Reading authoritative texts, papers; contacting
and communicating with relevant mainstream scientific, religious, coun-
seling authorities; sharing EE fears and wonders with significant others;
meeting and discussing similar types of EEs with other experiencers;
recording EE and thoughts/feelings about it in a personal journal and/or
submitting an EE account to the EHE Network; developing new inter-
ests in TV shows, documentaries, books, research papers, World Wide
Web to gather information about the EE itself.
Results of Potentiation: The EEer opens to exploration and investigates
EE within the traditional, mainstream world view; gathers a wide variety
of facts about the EE itself.
Challenges: To address the EE directly, investigate it further, and
recognize its uniqueness within the overall stream of everyday life events.
Critical juncture: Realization and insight that answers may not all be
found within the mainstream world view (paradigm); that authorities
may not have adequate answers and/or the explanations are not suffi-
ciently satisfying.
Crossroads to next stage: Awareness that there may be alternative
approaches of exploration that lie outside of the traditional ones.
Stage 2: Search for Reconciliation

Definition: The EEer chooses to widen the search beyond conven-
tional authorities and seek novel, alternative, and even unconventional
perspectives that were previously considered irrational and even absurd
before the initiating EE. This phase is highlighted by active, sometimes
frantic exploration to discover novel ways of testing, examining, and
coping with the EE.
Examples: Exploring such alternative ideologies as perennial philoso-
phy, mystery schools, new age, theosophy, Zen, Tao, nature-based relig-
ions (paganism); exploring such alternative health practices as
acupuncture, regression therapy, massage therapy, homeopathy, chiro-
practic, meditation/breath work; learning such divination tools as I
Ching, astrology, tarot, and runes; seeking out such alternative authori-
ties as gurus, mystics, psychics, and channelers.
Search for: Meaning of EE in a new context.
Questions asked: How and where do I find truth? Who else has had my
experience? What other avenues are there which can explain what
happened to me? Am I (my experience) unique or special? Am I just
another weirdo?
Cognitive dissonance: The search itself moves beyond the previously
acceptable paradigmatic framework into new contexts/behaviors that can
be threatening, peculiar, bizarre, or exotic, in efforts to integrate EE into
a new, revised life view and to reset the status quo.
Depotentiating activities: Locking immediately into the first ideology,
method, or practice that accepts EEer and EE; preoccupation/addiction
to tools, ritualistic practices and/or idolizing their practitioners (e.g.,
guru worship, abuse of psychic hotlines).
Results of depotentiation: Wider search is discontinued and the EEer
locks and/or converts into a new, narrow framework with its practitio-
ners. Locus of authority shifts, but the search and answers continue to
reside outside of self.
Potentiating activities: Exploring a wide variety of alternatives, assimi-
lating the best of what each has to offer; maintaining a balance of
expansion and discrimination in questioning practices, tools, and prac-
titioners rather than taking them at surface value. Locating a mentor,
practitioner, network, or support group of fellow experiencers who
recognize the process and will provide an accepting environment without
dogma.
Results of potentiation: A personal shift of life view that desires knowl-
edge over specific dogmas and the dawning realization that there may be
many roads to truth.
Challenges: To avoid the common pitfalls of guru worship (idolizing
another), inflation (idolizing self); to stay balanced with shifts of affect,
activity, life focus; to balance dramatic life-style changes based primarily
on the EE and its shorter-term aftereffects; to not adopt a “know-it-all”
attitude and/or “spiritual bypass” to counter concerns of family, friends,
colleagues, or practitioners.
Critical Juncture: Realization and insight that all roads have some
truth; discrimination to separate the wheat from the chaff so as to glean
personally-meaningful answers.
Crossroads to next stage: Awareness that there are many questions and
many answers that go beyond the EE itself; that the EE served as a
catalyst into other levels of consciousness and personal discovery; that
exploration of alternative perspectives is enlightening, meaningful, and
may generate additional EEs; additional EEs are sought and encouraged,
often testing a wide variety of tools and personal hypotheses.
Stage 3: Between Two Worlds

Definition: The intense search activity of the past stage(s) is muted or
put on hold as the metamorphosing EEer to EHEer takes time out to
assimilate, digest, and integrate findings into a new life view, sense of self,
and endeavors to get back to the tasks of everyday life. Observed as a
relatively-lengthy, sterile, dry, dormant period as the experiencer subjec-
tively vacillates between the old perspective and the new, unable to totally
embrace the new.
Examples: Outsider, outlander, stranger in a strange land; walking a
fine border/line, crossing the river, caught between two worlds, locked
in irons (feeling stuck), on the edge of the shore/cliff ready to leap;
existential dark night of the soul, return to the underworld (inner world),
return to alchemists’ hermetic vessel for mixing, blending, and refining.
Search focus: Meaning of experiencer-self.
Questions asked: Which world is real? Where do I fit in? How do my
experience and what I have learned about it sustain and fortify me? What
was that experience all about anyway in the grand scheme of things (life,
reality)?
Cognitive dissonance: Neither the old restrictive view of the world nor
the new one that loosely accommodates the experiencer and the experi-
ence(s) is satisfactory, yet the experiencer feels that he or she must choose
one or the other and often switches between them.
Depotentiating activities: Minimizing previous EE(s) and prior search
activity, including any insights, discoveries, meaning, and short-term
aftereffects achieved about self and alternative realities; categorizing own
EE(s) and quest as aberration of “real” life; re-classifying and lumping
all experiencers together and their views, methods, and tools as total
garbage; returning to the everyday world and its activities with a venge-
ance and zeal to make up for perceived lost time. Adopting the slogan
“ignorance is bliss” and/or one of several escape/avoidance behaviors in
efforts to ward off/shift focus away from EE(s) and spontaneous glimpses
of the experiential paradigm.
Results of depotentiation: Experiencer and the search are side-railed for
months, years, or even a lifetime. Long-term cognitive dissonance
festers, and chronic unease, use of defense mechanisms, and inertia take
their toll on body, mind, and spirit.
Potentiating activities: Accepting/valuing the experience for what it
was, what it meant, what it shared, where it led, and entertaining
possibilities for where it could lead. Feeling more comfortable with
ambiguity, paradoxes, uncertainty, and carrying this comfort level back
into everyday activities, even when experiencer has no firm answers.
Embracing any additional EEs and especially the meaningful insights
they engender. Thoughtfully and empathetically sharing experience(s)
with others. Striving to maintain a balance in life and life view.
Results of potentiation: Experiencer’s shift of life view incorporates the
best of both worlds, and accepts, assimilates, and integrates all life
experience into a coordinated, authentic collective representation of self.
Challenges: To avoid the common defensive pitfalls, especially when
no new insights or meaning appear forthcoming. Understanding that
EEs are typically not delivered upon demand or “willed” into being by
merely requiring them at one’s convenience. To find a personal comfort
zone that includes a renewed sense of self. (At this stage experiencers may
exhibit any or all classical characteristics inherent in the grieving process:
numbness, denial, anger, negotiation, and so on, while an old ego identity
dies and a new one is being formulated.)
Critical juncture: Realization and insight that the experience(s) served
as a vehicle toward a new level of conscious self-awareness and as a
gateway to greater self-discovery. Accepting, understanding, and inte-
grating all personas of self into a more integrated whole, a collective
personality of Self.
Crossroads to the next stage: Awareness that one is greater than the sum
of one’s parts and that there is no need to sacrifice a portion of oneself
in order to be wholly oneself; that the EHEer does not have to choose
either one world or the other, but may assimilate, integrate, “choose”
both, and is thus more integrated, healthier by doing so.
Stage 4: In the Experiential Paradigm

Definition: The EHEer envisions and “knows” the world/Universe as
one great, interconnected whole of living consciousness where artifi-
cially-constructed boundaries of reality are null in the “grand scheme of
things, essential truth.” Depending on point of entry to this stage,
experiencers may be catapulted into it at any age with no prior EE/EHE
contextual anchors, discover it more or less spontaneously, and already
have some contextual EE/EHE anchors, or return into it as a “place” for
gathering inspiration, fresh insight, and guidance.
Examples: EHEers “know” that they have “awakened,” “leaped into
the void,” “crossed the river,” “returned home.” Life view encompasses
“double vision” where either/or dilemmas may be resolved with
both/and hybrid considerations, often spurring fresh catalytic insights
and transmuting them to EHEs. Observations may include transcenden-
tal ecstasy, inspired creativity, frequent number and/or intensity of
serendipity, patterns of synchronicity, “good-luck,” insights, discoveries,
inventions.
Search for: Meaning of higher self.
Questions asked: Where do I go from here? Who else envisions the
world as I do? How will I recognize them? What are our possibilities and
extensions? How do we manifest them and share them with others? How
do I get back to “that place?”
Cognitive dissonance: The search that has brought the EHEer to a new
world pregnant with meaning, metaphor, discovery, and great vision is
not easily conveyed to those left behind in the old world. Initial sponta-
neous entry (and often subsequent, early reiterations) is paradoxically
both shocking and desired.
Depotentiating activities: Reluctance to explore further levels of aware-
ness and/or entertain/select new lifestyle, pursuits, and professional
options that seem to further widen the gap between EHEer and those
“left behind.” Clinging to old-world emotional attachments while body,
mind, and soul have crossed into the new world. Endeavoring to awaken
(significant) others before their time.
Results of depotentiation: The EHEer locks into a routine that allows
for larger world view, but does not investigate options further, nor
endeavor to increase overall awareness; remains emotionally attached to
specific people, values, and/or things; experiences aftereffects of deep
sadness and loss.
Potentiating activities: Recognizing, accepting, assimilating, and inte-
grating additional experiences into life view according to EHEer’s inner
criteria for meaningfulness rather than tacit acceptance of consensual
views; recognizing other EHEers and mutuality of shared path; more
easily shifting personality preferences, vocabulary, actions, social inter-
action style as circumstances warrant. Beginning to recognize and follow
a “calling.”
Results of Potentiation: EHEer realizes that he or she has a unique
contribution to make, purpose to fulfill, is an integral, dynamic part of
the whole, the Universe. Additional EEs to EHEs intuited as signposts,
becoming compass-pointers of life.
Challenges: To discover purpose and align with those actions, people,
and circumstances that add to fulfillment; follow intuition; to maintain
balance; recognize, accept, have compassion and love self and others for
the essential “who” that they are. To have the courage to let go of
out-worn attachments, including belief-structures and any residual re-
occurring patterns that no longer serve the evolving self and new
perspective. To have the courage to return to Stage 3 (and even Stage 2,
less likely Stage 1) when necessary to “gather one’s self” as self may (once
again) undergo a cycle of grief at loss (destruction) of a former ego
identification.
Critical juncture: Realization and insight that one’s purpose/way is
integral to a larger purpose/way and that any and all actions, thoughts,
emotions, imaginal desires are seamlessly interconnected within and
without. Understands that perceptions are (largely) based on personal
and cultural world view (i.e., maya), that cognitive boundaries (e.g.,
I-Thou, subject-experimenter, cause-effect, life-death) are convenient
constructs for human communication only (e.g., symbolic repre-
sentations, approximations of reality).
Crossroads to next stage: Awareness that we (the collective All) are
dynamic, evolving co-creators of the Universe as the Universe dynami-
cally evolves and is being defined and co-created by the we (All). Implicit
trust that “all will be as it is” as well as (paradoxically) understanding that
“as it is” does not necessarily mean (then yet again it may mean) what it
appears to mean at any selected, perceived moment of time/space.
Stage 5: A New Way of Being in the World

Definition: The EHEer forges a personally-fulfilling, meaningful path
that reflects and sustains inner calling as well as outwardly contributes
his or her personal best to the world-at-large. Both (many, multidimen-
sional) worlds are integrated within and without, represented (i.e.,
“known”) as one world of an intricately-interconnected singularity
where the EHEer mirrors, reflects, aligns with the Universe. The EHEer
is consciously aware that individual choices (core actions, thoughts,
emotions, desires, intents) have the power to dynamically shape out-
comes (the Universe), and he or she endeavors to live through that
knowledge responsively and responsibly.
Examples: The EHEer brings transcendental knowledge, “in-
ner/outer” calling, unique gifts “back to earth;” returns from Home to
home; “as above so below,” “the macrocosm is reflected in the micro-
cosm,” “after the return before the return,” “I am another yourself;”
“chop wood, carry water;” selecting an explicate order out of seemingly-
implicate chaos; the organizing principle, Self/Universe is both perfectly
hole and whole.
Search for: Meaning of the universal self.
Questions asked: How do I best align myself/my purpose/my calling
with Universe? How can I best serve given my collection of unique
talents/abilities/gifts? How can I contribute to overall evolution of
consciousness, including my own?
Cognitive dissonance: Experiential paradigm, transcendent awareness
has revealed an abundance of extensions, branches, worlds of potential
and possibility and inner self-awareness has deepened, strengthened and
coalesced the EHEer to the very core, yet the EHEer consciously senses
(with composed, calm urgency) that he or she must choose a path and
get on with the program of life and living in the world-at-large.
Depotentiating activities: Reluctance to recognize that even a seemingly
connected and purposeful life can still carry doubts, fears, frustrations,
and that these also can be signposts that leave EE/EHE aftereffects yet
unresolved, and that serve as compass-pointers for the process; requiring
perfection of self and others; getting caught up in formalizing, control-
ling “the goal” rather than recalling that the process leads naturally to
“the goal.”
Results of depotentiation: The EHEer may temporarily encounter set-
backs, indecision by reverting to old outworn, yet familiar defenses;
personal demands for perfection or desiring to will or control outcomes
stalls (sense of) fulfillment; potential contributions do not take form, are
not “brought back to earth,” new EEs are not recognized or transmuted;
long-term aftereffects of one or more previous EHEs remain dormant.
Potentiating activities: Acknowledging new EEs and transmuting them
into EHEs by questioning meaningfulness; going inside to resolve old
issues remaining, including long-term aftereffects of previous EHEs that
may have been “lost in the shuffle.” Taking setbacks and doubts in stride
and understanding that these are opportunities to evolve further; learn-
ing new skills, meeting new people and integrating these contributions
into the EHEer’s way (personal calling) as perspective shifts and evolves.
Recognizing, respecting, and having compassion for our very human-
ness, holes and wholes alike.
Results of potentiation: The EHEer is living, being, fulfilling, and doing
a personal project of transcendence (i.e., has grounded inner calling into
life-worthy projects), and has the flexibility to shift means, methods, and
tools as needed to accomplish it.
Challenges: To remain open to all facets of EHE, including those
insights, and circumstances that will enhance calling, and not to become
stuck in a particular method, means, or mode to accomplish it; to serve
as a human embodiment of one’s purpose/calling. To consciously, seam-
lessly, reiteratively return to the “operations center” (Stage 3) to regen-
erate batteries, while assimilating and integrating new (Stage 4)
transcendental information as needed to resolve cognitive dissonance.
To seamlessly (automatically) accommodate and fine-tune evolving shifts
of both inner and outer perspective and awareness as they are presented.
Critical juncture: Realization and insight that there is no magic bullet
or fast food package called “the Truth,” “the Way to Enlightenment”
nor does the EHEer self singularly embody (all) truth and enlighten-
ment. That reality is constantly, dynamically being re-formulated, de-
stroyed and re-created, and with that knowledge there is a responsibility
of choice as to where to place one’s energies and service. That the
universal self is necessary, integral to the Universe as the Universe is
perceived through the lens of self; that alignment choices made (includ-
ing no-choice) can co-create (have the imaginal power to shape) potential
tangible outcomes. To transmute EEs to EHEs has more or less become
second nature; EHE is understood as humankind’s first nature.
Crossroads into next stage: Awareness that dynamically, fluidly, organi-
cally aligning, harmonizing, refining, reinventing the self resonates and
enlightens throughout the universal village/kingdom, the Universe. The
EHEer has learned for him- or herself a personal way to navigate,
reiteratively re-negotiate, the staging areas of the EHE process in any
permutation as needed, when needed. The EHEer returns home “sim-
ply” to be, live, serve, fulfill and embody the matter of self, works, and
discoveries made along the way.
General Discussion
Before moving on to the individual stage by stage discussions to
highlight, and flesh out some of the key characteristics and pivotal points,
and the dynamics between them, I would like to alert readers to some
general observations that may add to their review of the matrix model
and exploratory map:
1. Each stage may be viewed as a “staging area of operations flow”

rather than a discrete, independent stage, patterned linearly into a
stair-step series of relative less-than/greater-than intervals.
2. Each stage includes both an inner, dynamic, perceptual/cognitive
flow, as well as is connected interdependently and transpersonally
with other stages via one or more transmuted, catalytic, pivotal,
insights. (One could just as well argue that each sub-stage classifier
transfer or series of transfers — challenges to critical juncture —
mark pivotal points within each stage.) Ongoing dualistic debates
continue to rage regarding levels of analysis, and so at this point, I
will just concede to the reader’s comfort level for weighing relative
degrees of structure (form) versus process (dynamics).
3. The crossroads for each stage could also be modeled as halfway
points between stages (e.g., 3+, 5+). That was my intent when
endeavoring to show both the fluidity as well as the discrete qualifier
characteristics of each stage. Crossroads involve the catalytic fusion
of both decision and realization to reach (evolve to) a heightened
(or deepened) level of conscious awareness.
4. As always when we work with EEs, and especially EHEs, there is
the problem of language, symbolic expression, and translation. In
order to describe and communicate the pivotal, the transcendental,
the numinous, EHEers must resort to a common language that can
be grasped and understood by others. In our culture there are several
possible modes, particularly story-telling literary devices (e.g., alle-
gory, metaphor, myth), art (e.g., dance, painting, architecture,
music), and science (e.g., logic flow charts, maps, mathematics).
5. Readers will quickly note the change of language expression
across the stages. These too can be clues for us, both as to our own
comprehension of the process and when used for communicating
EEs and EHEs with others and to different audiences.
6. Because this is a characteristic map representing a wide range of
experiences and experiencer expressions, I have endeavored to
synthesize the flavor, color, and tone of the attributes without
detailing the variety of descriptions used to symbolize those con-
cepts. For example, I use a more neutral “Universe” to describe the
incredible array of symbols to denote the “Source,” “Ultimate
Reality,” “All-that-Is,” “God,” “Goddess,” the “Dynamic Force.”
7. Language in the advanced stages of EHE is more “fuzzy” than

not to those who prefer “crisp” expressions of direct sensory “tan-
gible reality.” I cannot help that, as these are the words and the
expressions gleaned from experiencers, and a major reason for
sharing these data and writing this paper. Instead, one could ask the
questions of individual and cultural differences (preferences) re-
garding comfort levels with fuzzy sets, or contribute to the artificial
intelligence/cognitive science work being conducted investigating
them and/or other forms of non-linear processing.
8. Indeed, most of the long-term aftereffects offered by EHEers
include many such intangible expressions in these often “heroic
explorer” efforts to communicate experiences within the limits of
common symbolic language. Recall that the EHE Network solicits
only (formal) written reports and we study those reports equally for
contributing value. The experiencer is not talking one-to-one off
the top of his or her head, nor does he or she have the benefit of eye
contact and other body language to further convey the gist of the
communication. Nor are they recording a journal entry to them-
selves or for a family member or friend. It takes courage (and
foresight, and the ability to introspect, retrospect, and then tangibly
ground in intelligent, coherent, linear, written language) to produce
each and every one of these narrative reports and submit them to
relative strangers and/or essay contest judges.
9. These experiencers are a rich, largely-untapped natural resource
and have much to share with us in their own words. Their narratives
can be examined by many fields of scientific investigation, the arts
and humanities, and have potentially innovative and useful applica-
tions.
10. Scholars of religious texts, literature/arts, folklore, archetype,
divination tools, mystery schools, and other “fraternal” organiza-
tions that include rites of passage will readily recognize many of
these stages (and stages within stages) as perennial efforts across
cultures to attempt to communicate what is commonly called the
“journey of life.”
11. The Map is a working, living document. These 12 classifiers are
only a few that could be used to differentiate the stages and the
dynamics within each stage, and the 60 characteristics only a small
sampling of what experiencers have shared with us.
Stage 1: The Initiating Event/Experience

Each of us will be confronted with an exceptional experience — and
we will recognize it as such — at least once in our lifetime. The question
here is not whether it will happen, or when, or of what type, or where to
place it, but rather how we react to and deal with that initiating experi-
ence (Brown, 1997b). From this frame of reference, an anomalous event
is “out there” until some one individual pays attention to it and experi-
ences it as something “in here.” In the traditional jargon of human
information processing psychology (HIPP) we would say that the stimu-
lus (signal) has crossed a critical sensory attentional threshold. By defi-
nition, the instigating EE lies outside or beyond the experiencer’s
everyday steady state (status quo) of life experience — it is exceptional.
This does not preclude the fact that the experiencer may have had other
EEs at different times or in other circumstances over his or her lifetime.
It simply means that this particular EE has some quality or measure,
inherent strength or potency, to capture the EEer’s attention. Indeed,
this is the case when EHEers, upon retrospect, often remark that there
was something different about “this” particular experience (the one
around which they focus their account) because it moved them to take
notice and investigate further. When we look at EEs as initiators into
the EHE process we are led to several thought-provoking questions:
What was it about that particular event that brought it to the

conscious attention (crossed a subjective threshold) of the experi-
encer?
Why this particular EE and not others? For example, why an NDE
and not a déjà vu?
Which qualities of the event were sufficient to cross this attention
threshold?
What are the characteristics of the threshold crossed?
What are the individual differences which correlate to higher or
lower thresholds of attention toward these events and those exper-
iencers who convey (transmute) them into conscious experiential
awareness?
Can relative strength within an EE class/type, or relative relation-
ships between different classes/types be measured (e.g., ordered,
ranked, clustered) and/or graphically represented?
Can these qualitative (and possibly quantitative) descriptors help us
predict who will have an EE, and who of those will engage and
convey the EHE process more effectively and efficiently?
Within the context of HIPP, and noting individual differences of
attention and motivation, an exceptional event may be likened to a
“signal” against the background steady-state “noise” of everyday life and
its expectations of a predictable, status quo environment/world. In this
perspective, Signal Detection Theory (SDT) borrowed from communi-
cation engineers and applied to processing psychology may be of some
value (Green & Swets, 1966; Klatsky, 1975). Basically, in this scenario,
the anomalous event is the signal, everyday life is the noise; the experi-
encer is the receiver of the signal. When the event reaches conscious
awareness — that is, it is attended to, it spikes above an attention
threshold and is recognized as an anomaly or an EE — then the
experiencer can make a (conscious/subconscious) decision as to whether
to respond to (potentiate) it, or to ignore (depotentiate) it. In the basic
2 x 2 factorial design, “Signal? Yes/No — Response? Yes/No,” individuals
may apprehend signal (anomaly) and respond to it. In this case a Yes/Yes
would be considered a “Hit.” For purposes of this paper, the EHE
process is engaged. Likewise, the individual may apprehend a signal that
“was not sent” and respond that he or she apprehended a signal anyway,
a “False Alarm (FA).” The question of what comprises a signal becomes
an issue in this case, particularly in laboratory settings where the quality
and/or measure of (externally-generated) stimuli often serve as inde-
pendent variables. From an EHE process perspective, the “sig-
nals/events” are just as likely to arise from the inside and/or direct
causality cannot be established. For many EEers the very spontaneity of
a déjà vu, eureka insight, lucid dream, or feelings of nostalgia is sufficient
to engage the process and often does. In these cases it is not so much the
type of the experience itself as it is the surprise of the “out-of-the-blue”
quality of the event. To continue with SDT, when an event signal is
apprehended and the EEer chooses not to respond, it is a “Miss.” In these
cases, EEers elect not to engage the EHE process; in effect they chose
not to potentiate an experience for the time being or “forever.” In
retrospect, EHEers often cite a litany of fears common across many
first-time experiencers for this non-response stemming from personal
past conditioning and/or cultural taboos regarding anomaly, exception,
or being different in some way. This is an especially-difficult dilemma
for those EEers whose feet have been firmly planted in the soil of
consensual reality for decades and who have abided by a particular
paradigm (belief structure) that cannot accommodate the experience —
and sometimes cannot accommodate the very experiencers themselves.
In these cases we could hypothesize that the response threshold is set
inordinately “high” when compared to the relatively lower response
thresholds of experiencers who have had a number of experiences,
potentiated experiences, or one that was particularly jarring. The final 2
x 2 factorial cell includes those events that were both not apprehended
and did not elicit any response, that is, a “Correct Rejection.” From the
individual’s standpoint the non-event was indeed a non-event. It could
also be the case that both the attention threshold and the response
threshold are set relatively high against spurious input and unqualified
responses.
Signal Detection Theory is useful to begin teasing apart the observ-
able objective factors that come into play for the event to experience
transmutation (attention/awareness of event to experience) and for un-
derstanding whether the EHE process is engaged or not, and if so, how
(reaction/response).The notion of co-varying thresholds (and their in-
itial settings, and shifts of settings over the process) for signal and
response is especially apropos for its ease of communication with experi-
mental researchers. Too, this framework could assist in creating new
hypotheses to consider the EHE process in general, and to begin to
answer some of the more specific questions asked at the beginning of this
section.
One other model which is, perhaps, better known to personality
psychologists may also serve as a useful conceptual approach to these
questions. The Jungian-based Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)
specifically looks at individual differences in experiential apprehension
and perception, as well as at individual preferences in reaction and
response to perceptual inputs (Jung, 1954; McCaulley, 1981; Myers,
McCaulley, Quenk, & Hammer, 1998).10 Very simply speaking, indi-
viduals have a preference or predilection for how they apprehend (per-
ceive) “the world” as well as how they respond to, and evaluate (judge)
those perceptions.11 In general, these preferences do not change signifi-
cantly, if ever, over an individual’s lifetime. Usually, preferences become
even more strongly entrenched as individuals become more familiar with
their way of perceiving the world and making critical decisions about it.
From the EHE process standpoint, this could reflect the status quo
center of operations for the individual (and collectively, mark the norms
of consensual reality for a particular organization or a culture).
10. MBTI resources for testing, research, and application are available from the Center
for Applications of Psychological Type, Inc., 2815 N. W. 13th Street, Suite 401,
Gainesville, Florida, 32609, or from their website at http://www.capt.org.
11. See Krippner (1984) and Rosen, (1994, pp. 167-178) for an illuminating look at
parapsychology as a research community, that is, as a cultural entity comprised of four
diverse operating styles based on a topology of perception and judging preferences.
Yet, in some cases, one or more preference factors may dramatically
shift along either perception or judging continua when measured over
the lifetime of an individual or pre- to post-crisis episodes (McCaulley,
1981; also see Arcangel, 1997; Van Sant, 1999). In very rare cases, up to
all four of the primary preference factors may have shifted when meas-
ured in test-retest (longitudinal) reliability studies. This brings Jung’s
theory of the individuation process into consideration, and general
comparisons to the EHE process — again highlighting the questions
raised earlier and underscoring the value of longitudinal data. At that
point we must ask, what kinds of experiences can shift a person’s prefer-
ences so dramatically? One further note, the majority (75%) of individu-
als in Western culture prefer apprehending and perceiving “the world”
via their 5 classical (tangible) senses (Keirsey & Bates, 1984). This
disposition can create quite a cognitive dissonance for many experi-
encers, particularly those who have been catapulted into the heights and
depths of outer/inner space (that is, into a seemingly mystical or “cosmic”
experience), or those who have encountered otherwise non-tangible
people, places, and things. Perception of reality’s solidarity may also be
rocked to its very foundation when experiencers register a particularly
powerful insight, “distant” (time/space) recollection, or a numinous
visceral “feeling sense” that something is not quite the same, somehow,
in some way. Note here that exceptional experiences are exceptional, not
because they are odd or bizarre events occurring in a vacuum, but because
they are exceptions to “normal” everyday expectations of an orderly,
predictable reality as defined by the individual in context of the main-
stream. I hypothesize that individuals with a strong preference for
classical 5-sense perceptual input anchored deeply in the consensus of
tangible reality would be the least likely to apprehend and potentiate an
EE — and engage the EHE process — unless the initiating experience
literally ejects the experiencer off his or her moorings.
Because White’s theory of the EHE covers a wide-range of experi-
ences from the simply odd to the incredibly bizarre (as defined by both
experiencer and culture), the questions of type of experience, attention
and response thresholds, and individual differences are particularly per-
tinent to Stage 1. We do not presume that the EE highlighted in a
narrative account is necessarily the first EE the individual has experi-
enced. Indeed, advanced EHEers’ more detailed retrospective reports
often cite several different types of EEs having occurred prior to the one
that is highlighted in the narrative, some of those stretching back into
childhood. All we can say is that there is some quality or potency of a
particular EE that, for a particular experiencer, has initiated a search for
answers about the EE (the mark of Stage 1 potentiated) and thus engaged
the EHE process. As students of EHE, we can thus begin to look at the
complex factors that contribute to the indefinite concepts of meaning,
what is meaningful, and personal meaningfulness that are key compo-
nents to the EHE process at any stage.
Very simply speaking, all EEers and EHEers begin at a hypothetical
Ground Zero, the status quo, a relatively-steady state of a personally-
functional life view nested within a shared reality of culture’s consensual
world view. The dynamics of Stage 1 focus on fitting the experience (and
the experiencer) into an inviolate cultural framework. Activity centers
around seeking out respected cultural authorities and their resources.
For particularly bizarre EEs, there may be no authority nor the authori-
tative resources to provide an intrinsically-satisfactory answer. At this
point, either the EEer honors his or her experience and stretches the
envelope of what is construed as acceptable authority, or they depoten-
tiate the experience in one way or another, returning to the consensual
fold. At the crossroads of Stage 1 and Stage 2 (“in between”), the EEer
once again is faced with a critical decision as a result of insufficient or
unsatisfactory information gathered from their search in Stage 1. To
progress to Stage 2, experiencers must elect to question the norms of
culture and of what constitutes an authority rather than consciously
denying the EE or their personal comprehension of it.
Although all EHEs technically begin with the experience of an
anomalous event, for those experiencers who have already encountered
several EEs, and especially after having had transmuted these to EHEs,
the intensity and even the necessity of Stage 1 quickly become more or
less automatic. In essence, more seasoned experiencers may quickly
mitigate, or totally bypass this stage altogether to return to more inter-
mediate stages (processing levels) with which they are already familiar.
This too may be viewed as a variation of the learning process for those
scholars who prefer to look at the EHE from the contexts of classical
psychology, cognition, and development theory.
Stage 2: The Search for Reconciliation

Although the EEer has already endeavored to reconcile the EE within
the confines of mainstream norms, at Stage 2 the search for reconciliation
begins in earnest. The major focus of the search is no longer about how
the EE and EEer fits — that is, can be accommodated back into — the
more comfortable norm; but rather, how the experiencer can reconcile
him- or herself and the experience into any recognized framework that
can accommodate both. The search thus becomes relatively open-ended
and initially the possibilities for potential reconciliation appear endless
and hopeful. For many, this is the stage in which the search activity is
most obvious and most easily observed by others. In a sense, the EEer
has declared a “cause” to understand the EE in depth and is most anxious
to discover a context — a place — for that cause, one that will embrace
the experiencer as well.
Although the experiencer has more or less rejected the security of the
mainstream’s easy answers, and feels a decided relief because of that
choice to move the search process forward, it is at this stage (perhaps
more than any other) at which the EEer feels most insecure, most
groundless, and at a loss. Reiterations (repeat visits) to this stage are not
uncommon for EEers and EHEers alike as the experience itself, or the
addition of novel experiences, shift perspective (often rapidly and dra-
matically) during energetic attempts to reconcile self to experience as
well as to re-anchor both within a satisfactory context. For many, the
context sought will be a slight shift to what had been comfortable in the
past, similar to one’s background and inherent leanings of the past. For
example, those trained in the scientific tradition may seek out research
parapsychologists and their resources;12 those utilizing allopathic medi-
cine may seek out alternative medicine and practitioners; those used to
confiding with a friend or family member may seek out psychics/other
experiencers who have had a similar experience; and those who have
found comfort in a particular religious tradition may seek out a church
that espouses similar beliefs, a familiar godhead and set of rituals and
teachings. These shifts to reframe the experience (and the experiencer-
self) within an alternative — yet intrinsically, a relatively-comfortable —
world view are graduated trial-and-error movements, and in themselves,
may become a holding pattern for many EEers. From the perspective of
the overarching EHE process, we see these reconciliation efforts as
attempts to fit one’s self and one’s experience into an acceptable frame-
work which is, as yet, still defined by others.
Again we need to reiterate that the so-called comfort zone (i.e., an
inner “sense” of renewed balance, homeostasis, resetting of the status
quo) is entirely self-defined by experiencers in their reports and taken at
their face value as a qualifier characteristic. Thus, experiencers who have
reset their status quo and discovered an inner sense of relief for making
an (any) observable choice which fosters (perceived) progress toward
meaningfulness may appear alien or even deluded to those who have not
encountered a similar experience personally, nor metaphorically by
walking in the shoes of other experiencers.13 At this stage more than any
12. Charles Tart states that his website, http://www.issc-taste.org/ or “T.A.S.T.E.”

(The Archive of Scientists’ Transcendent Experiences) was created specifically for
scientists to debunk the stereotype that “real” scientists do not have “spiritual,” “mys-
tical,” or “psychic” experiences.
other that experiencers actively begin to stretch old paradigms (i.e., a
former belief structure) while entertaining possible alternatives for new
perspectives and contexts. Yet, unlike victims of natural disaster, crises,
or trauma, the experiencer does not typically have the luxury of cultur-
ally-recognized support groups, nor access to EHEer-seasoned practi-
tioners. By definition, both the experience and the experiencer are
anomalous, a-nominal (without a label) and a-normal (outside of normal
range), and the mainstream offers few, if any, supportive anchors that
honor EEs and EEers. This dilemma (cognitive dissonance and its
challenges), perhaps more than at any other stage, best describes the
plight of the EEer and ultimately what becomes another critical juncture
in the EHE process. It also marks another major point of departure of
the EHE process from more predictable patterns better studied and
understood by transpersonal psychologists. (Recall that the first point of
departure was the perceptual apprehending of an anomaly and respond-
ing to its cognitive dissonance.) Victims of recognized traumas and
recognizable life crises (such as natural disaster, grief, “mid-life,” “exis-
tential angst”) have a bounty of socially-sanctioned support structures
and recognized resources from which to choose. In our culture, EEers
typically do not. Further, if no particular life crisis is immediately evident,
then the ubiquitous label “stress” and its cousins may be offered as a
causal factor. In this consensual context the EEer-initiate may be offered
options to reduce (depotentiate) generalized stress (etiology unknown)
to get on with the stuff of everyday living.14
Exceptional experiencers who choose to potentiate an experience and
more or less have identified with the experiencer-self find relatively few
resources available within the mainstream. Rather than mitigating the
experience, the choice of Stage 2 has been made — to consciously
explore, honor the experience, and to see where it leads. This is also the
stage in which experiencers are most vulnerable to authorities or re-
sources that are quick to accommodate the experience and embrace the
13. As Jenny Wade (1996, p. 277) writes eloquently about levels of functioning: “This
indiscriminate relegation of all nonordinary [non-Newtonian, non-“para”-normal]
states to some retrograde status must be recognized as axiomatic for people with
mainstream levels of functioning, since developmental theories are epigenetic. That is,
higher stages are inaccessible and incomprehensible to people functioning at lower
levels of development, but the reverse is not true. Furthermore, higher stages do not
appear to be higher to people functioning at a given level, but lower.”
14. For an insightful discussion into the missing link of EHE within divisions of
mainstream psychology, see Reed (1997). See also the books by Cortright (1997) and
Wade (1996) for recent developments in the field of transpersonal psychology, including
the introduction and discussion of innovative, holistic models.
experiencer. In effect, I suggest that this drive to attach to a teacher,
organization, and/or belief structure is similar to that of newly-hatched
chick who indiscriminately imprints on the first “parent” (e.g., dogma,
ideology, guru) to come along. For the remainder of Stage 2 (and
subsequent iterations of trial-and-error testing) activities are centered
around the issue of authority in general, and more specifically who speaks
“the truth” about these types of experiences and from where the truth
stems. Healthy potentiation of the process becomes a conscious sampling
of a variety of alternatives as the experiencer learns to sort the wheat from
chaff. By the critical juncture of Stage 2, experiencers have realized that
there may be some truth to be gleaned from any or all of the myriad
presentations of truth encountered to help identify and explain excep-
tional experience(s). The EE has brought the experiencer out into the
world in order to explore and investigate alternatives. In the process of
“going out” the experiencer finds he or she “goes in” to sort, to make
value judgments and refinements that are intrinsically satisfying, and to
reset the comfort zone. At the crossroads between Stages 2 and 3, the
experiencer becomes more or less aware that he or she may be the best
authority on his or her particular direct experience. The experiencer has
absorbed — and to some degree been absorbed by — the experience and
can therefore effectively choose to define self by the nature of the
experience. The experiencer-self identity has emerged and been realized.
It is also at this point at which we may observe EEers radically adopting
their experiencer identity more or less exclusively, and sometimes to the
detriment of the whole-self personality.15
Stage 3: Between Two Worlds

One of the best ways to define this stage is that it is the quintessential
crossroads for the EHE process as a whole. In effect, this is where the
previous life and world view structures are confronted with new input.
The key to the center of operations in Stage 3 is that experiencers must
be consciously aware of both old and new positions before cognitive
dissonance can be resolved to any satisfactory degree. In contrast to the
largely-extroverted (that the world or the authority is “out there”) search
activities that are more easily observed in the previous stages, and
15. For example, those who have had one or more psychical experience may announce
that they are consequently “a psychic,” or those who have had a mystical experience may
write an authoritative book on the personal steps to enlightenment. In such cases,
experiencers may have reconciled their Stage 2 experiencer-self, recognized their inner
sense of authority, and therefore, claim to be an authority.
especially in Stage 2. Stage 3 is characterized by intense inner world work
to arrive at a form of resolution. This stage is perhaps the best studied
by post-modern existential psychologists and philosophers who may
mark the dilemmas that roil within and the individual’s need to do battle
with life crises.
Yet, there is an additional battle that, at least in the early steps of Stage
3, is specific and unique to most EEers and newly-emergent EHEers.
After the experiencer has more or less come to terms with, reconciled
and honored the experience in some personally-meaningful way, the
experiencer-self must choose to return once again to the culture at large
(or not). The individual’s life view has been significantly altered to
accommodate the experience, but it and the experiencer continue to
remain at odds within the mainstream view. The experiencer is aware of
the source of the alienation that he or she feels, and has come to grips
with it in the best way he or she can. Yet, this is not felt as the nebulous
anxiety of being different, “an outsider” in search of a way to fold back
into the mainstream of life. At this point, the experiencer understands
very well that he or she is an outsider and the reason is because of an
experience that has already proven itself to be a source of “meaning”
somehow, having been validated in some personally-meaningful way.
The onset of Stage 3, more than any other stage, is the point at which
experiencers are most likely to depotentiate their experiences, resort to
one or more defense and return (often with a vengeance) to the safe haven
of everyday life. The objective of this stage, as with all stages and their
reiterations — and to continue on with the process — is a return “to life.”
The challenge this time is that the experiencer-self has been enriched by
the experience(s) to such a degree that he or she cannot go back to the
old world as it was without sacrificing a significant part of him or herself.
In recognizing that they cannot totally revert to the old, once again
coming face to face with the need to relieve the cognitive dissonance
between the old and new, experiencers feel compelled to discover a
higher-order integral form that can better accommodate both. This
deconstruct-reconstruct dynamic is key to all EHE stages (and all life
stages) in which the experiencer desires “more” resolution, an aug-
mented return (based on the Gestalt tenet that “the whole is greater than
the sum of its parts”) to homeostasis, to one’s center of meaningfulness.
In essence, advanced EHEers reiterate that it is this stage (and sub-
sequent returns to it over their lifetime) more than any other, that is
crucial to the overall EHE process. It is the crossroads of the crossroads,
and as such, is absolutely necessary for physical, emotional, mental and
spiritual integration, regeneration, and survival.
Many EEers will never get to, nor feel compelled to move into this
stage as a conscious choice. Entry into Stage 3 is accessed directly from
either Stage 2 or Stage 4; yet to navigate it successfully experiencers will
have felt the full strength of both Stage 2 and Stage 4. To make this
particularly strong statement, let us return again to the questions of
relative EE strength and individual preferences for apprehension and
decision thresholds discussed in Stage 1. White (personal communica-
tion) recognized early on that even in the recognized universe of EEs
(and their potential transmutations into EHEs) there were varying
degrees of “anomaly” along a hypothetical psychological and cultural
continuum called everyday experience. These statistical outliers to the
norm might in themselves be measurable (ordered, perhaps ranked) by
their aftereffects. For example, few would disagree that a fleeting note
of nostalgia, a short burst into the sports zone, or a remarkable coinci-
dence would carry the same inner-sense of weightiness and import of a
full-blown NDE, an OBE vision of a disaster, contact with otherworldly
beings, or the spontaneous healing of a morbid disease. I suggest that the
short-term (residual) aftereffects of such experiences provide clues into
these differentials by marking EEers’ entry stages. Further, the long-
term aftereffects provide clues as to the extension, the staying power, of
these direct experiences over the whole of the EHE process — to the
extent that it (the EE nested within the process) has been potentiated.
We have noted in our exploration that points of entry do indeed vary
(Brown & White, 1997, both reported and unpublished data). In general,
for the majority of EEers and EHEers, the questing begins with Stage 1
and proceeds more or less linearly to Stage 3 in the progressive develop-
mental pattern described above. Of course, this process proceeds only if
and when the experiencer consciously decides (potentiates) that the
experience is worthy of being investigated beyond the answers and
solutions provided by “the other” authorities. In Stage 3, the assimilat-
ing, testing, and integrating continue at deeper levels (i.e., inside, well
below the surface in the psychic “underground”), and is represented by
the dilemmas and challenges common to EEers and EHEers alike in the
process of creative reformulation of the nested self within a new world
view. On the other hand, experiencers of particularly bizarre (alien
abduction), sensational (transcendental), repetitive (similar type), fre-
quent (dissimilar types), and/or “long-lasting” EEs may literally be
transported into outer space and directly into Stage 4 — the experiential
paradigm — with little to no conscious forewarning. Individual differ-
ences seem to play a key role in how the experiencer reacts to the
experiential paradigm (EP); these differences are best captured in the
short-term (direct experience residual) and long-term aftereffects. As we
will see in Stage 4 the EP is so diametrically different from the everyday
steady state of being that the first order of business for the experiencer
is to attempt to anchor, compare and contrast in some way the EP world
with that of the everyday. Thus direct entry or initiation into the EHE
process via Stage 4 will reverse the “typical progressive developmental,”
quasi-linear stair-step process we have observed with Stages 1 to 2 to 3.
Instead, entry to 4 reverts to 3, and Stage 3 becomes the (inner) battle
between the worlds ranging across a much wider gulf than for those
experiencers who have already worked “up” to Stage 3 — and already
have had familiarity with, or a history of, EE assimilation and integration.
Simply speaking, the gulf (and the EEer’s level of shock) may be repre-
sented as that distance (dissonance) between consensus Ground Zero and
Stage 4 apprehended in an instant, and contrasted to the relative subjec-
tive ease of graduated shifting between Stages 1 to 2 to 3 over many years.
As stated previously, entry into Stage 3 is contingent upon, and may
come from, either the crossroads of conscious awareness that occur in
either Stage 2 or Stage 4. At Stage 3, the “work” of the crossroads of
crossroads (the crucible) begins in earnest and continues throughout an
individual’s lifetime. Neither the initial trial-and-error, the reconcili-
ation efforts of Stage 2, nor the one transcendental, unitive experience
of Stage 4 is sufficient to successfully continue beyond the full challenges
of Stage 3. To catch the whole meaning of this stage, to honor the inner
depths of this stage, a minimum of experience with navigating both
Stages 2 and 4 is necessary for even the first pass. For those who have
entered via Stage 2, they will need to experience, at least once, the EP of
the unitive transcendence of Stage 4. For those who have been catapulted
into Stage 4, they will need to experience the wider search for reconcili-
ation of the locus of authority and the acceptance of the experiencer-self
of Stage 2.
During Stage 3, the before and after worlds dynamically converge to
meet, collide, and conform within “the tangible body of” the experiencer.
A metamorphosis occurs: the EEer becomes a first-time EHEer; and
repeat EHEers establish within themselves yet another (triangulated,
hybrid, gestalt, new) world that has been explored, conquered, claimed,
and mapped. For repeat EHEers with much experience with the staging
area challenges, critical junctures, and crossroads of Stage 3, returns to
this stage become more or less automatic as novel EEs are quickly
integrated into EHEs.
Stage 4: In the Experiential Paradigm

Whether experiencers are catapulted into the experiential paradigm,
spontaneously cross into it, or their everyday steady state has evolved to
living through it as a way of life, the key note of Stage 4 is “knowing” for
oneself that unity is consciousness and that all boundaries are con-
sciously-constructed choices. Stage 4 may serve as either an abrupt entry
point or the result of a progressive (trial-and-error) evolutionary point
of arrival. With repeat EHEers, who have experienced several (many)
returns to the dynamic crossroads of Stage 3, Stage 4 may be experienced
as a conscious return to transcendence. Being “in the experiential para-
digm” is often expressed simply as “home” or as a “return to home,” a
“place” that houses one’s essence and essential spirit.16 It is at this stage
at which language and symbolic expression shift the most dramatically
as experiencers grasp for metaphorical anchors and/or ways to commu-
nicate the transcendent world(s).17 Written expressions representing the
concomitants of these direct experiences and their short-term afteref-
fects are especially remarkable for their irregularities in punctuation and
grammar (e.g., “I KNOW,” “I Knew,” “the town felt familiar”) and
descriptions of quasi-sensory experience (e.g., “I swirled into pulsing
black space,” “I became a pinpoint of LIGHT”).
Whereas Stage 3 entry is characterized by apprehending incongruent,
discordant worlds (realities) with a wide gulf between them, Stage 4 entry
is noted for its total immersion into one (holographic) world where
dimensions, divisions, gradations, and paradoxes simply do not exist.18
For experiential paradigm experiencers the consensual rules of linear
time, cause-effect logic, either-or, measures of more or less, are merely
prisms (maya), convenient human constructs (hypotheses, theories, be-
liefs), and selected reflections of the dynamic (living, organic, recombi-
nant consciousness) whole of the hologram (Reality, All-that-Is,
Universe). Simply speaking, the contrast between entry to Stages 3 and
4 is as different as night and day. In terms of the EHE process, both are
necessary and neither alone is sufficient to progress to Stage 5. With
every subsequent repeat visit to, every iteration of Stage 4, experiencers
16. One’s essence may also be described as soul; Self and essential spirit as living
consciousness, God, Universe, Nature, and so on, depending on individual preferences.
17. The language at this point is incredibly varied. Experiencers’ (prior) backgrounds,
belief structures, and familiarity with the Stage 4 Experiential Paradigm seems to play
a large role in the form of expression used. I have endeavored to select (synthesize,
translate) words and phrases across experiencer reports that might be a more familiar
language to readers of this Journal.
18. Steve Rosen’s transcultural (multi-dimensional) approach to the evolution of the
“body” of wholeness via questions of science and perceived anomaly, ambiguity, and
paradox continues as a major theme for his new book in progress, Phenomenological
Quantum Topology. As he explains: “‘Phenomenological’ because it works with the kind
of grounded intuition offered by people like Merleau-Ponty and Heidegger, ‘topologi-
cal’ because it features paradoxical dimensional structures like the Klein bottle and the
Moebius strip, and ‘quantum’ because these structures are quantized (i. e., discontinuous
with regard to classical space,” [Rosen, personal communication, August, 1999]).
return to the inner mixing bowl of Stage 3 in order to formulate, rarefy,
and blend a new coherence of self and world view.
Over time, trial and error life experience with the transmuting of
anomalous events to exceptional experiences to exceptional human ex-
periences, and with increased familiarity of the EHE process overall, the
passageway between 3 çè 4 may become itself a seamless flow of
dynamic, reiterative, “inner/outer” operations. For those EHEers who
are relatively comfortable and familiar with integrating the seams of
(seemingly) paradoxical worlds, and with incorporating new inner and
outer worlds as they are apprehended, navigating the passageway(s)
between the worlds may become yet again more or less an automatic,
functional response. Thus, each iteration between Stages 3 and 4
strengthens the passageway (mode of operation) between them and
refines the movement above (4) and below (3) through the center point
of being — that is, through the body of the experiencer (Rosen, 1996).
In essence, the resolution process becomes (is reduced to) second nature.
Metaphorically-speaking (and metaphysically-speaking), the EHEer at
that universal moment and at the center of Universe, is the quintessential
perfect point of singularity between heaven and earth.19
Stage 4 is understood among EHEers as the “knowing” space. First
time visitors with no prior apprehension (perception) of EEs, and sea-
soned EHEers alike, are easily recognized by this simple expression in
their narratives: “I know.” This verb is usually typed in capital letters or
highlighted in quotation marks to indicate that this particular mode of
apprehension was not arrived at or caused by logical deduction of the
intellect, nor did it stem from a conscious desire to direct the will (intent,
willfulness) toward a particular outcome (e.g., a transcendental experi-
ence, a miracle, a psychical vision on demand). To know is not to believe,
to understand, to feel, to sense, to have figured-out, to desire to the point
of esctasy about that desire. Nor is knowing equated with intense
scholarly training and study, participating in intensive psychic or mystical
awareness workshops, performing psi or mysterious feats, or selling the
masses or one student on “the way of truth and reality.” “To Know”
simply is to “Know.” Often it is easier to translate the experiential
paradigm by what it is not, rather than attempt to describe what it is.
19. Readers at this point may note the sequencing of 5 to 4 to 3 to 2 to 1 are now
representing nominal qualities to demonstrate both consensual usage of meaning/di-
rection as well as experiential usage of symbolic levels of meaning (functioning). In
effect, number has enjoyed multiple meanings/interpretations over the ages and across
cultures. Relative quantity is only one form of expression and is the most dominant form
in contemporary Western culture.
The word “ineffable” today is commonly used, and yet that too is
describing the difficulty the experiencer has in translation. It is not a
remark that signals direct knowledge conveyed through the body of the
experiencer, or through the experience itself.20 For the experiencer,
being in the experiential paradigm is truth, is reality, is evidence, and is
most tangible — wholly tangible — the one pure essence.
For some transpersonal psychologists and noetic scientists (including
parapsychologists who study “survival” issues) direct experience of tran-
scendental awareness is the whole story, the causal reason for, and
reasoning behind, the paradigm shift. It is the dynamic that speaks to the
notion of before and after a particular pivotal point. Further, for many
first-time mystics, new age sojourners (and for the popular culture
depicted in the media), the grail of transcendence is the ultimate discov-
ery, the goal. Metaphorically, mystics retire to the mountain to live
outside of the world, and grail seekers/explorers celebrate their thanks-
giving “upon arriving” to the new world. Both responses depotentiate
the EHE process if and when (a glimpse of) the experiential paradigm
alone is made to serve as the goal. Advanced EHEers (and only upon
their arrival to the Stage 4/5 crossroads of awareness) will have discov-
ered the supreme cosmic joke, the secret coded message, which has been
told over the ages in many forms: That the lauded hero’s journey out is
only “half” of the journey. The rest of the story, the flip-side, the requisite
fulfillment of the explorer’s journey is equally if not more treacherous —
to carry the mountain, the new world discoveries, the “Knowledge” back
to the beginning, to the starting point, bringing Paradise back “home.”
Stage 5: A New Way of Being in the World

Throughout the EHE process the experiencer has visited and been
confronted by many worlds: the old and the new, the inner and outer,
the existential depths and the experiential heights. What began as an
anomalous event apprehended became an exceptional experience worthy
of note, which opened up the EEer to the possibility that the everyday
world might not be all that it appears to be on the surface. The EE, thus,
became a potential catalyst for personal change, a marker for comparison
between the everyday and the exceptional. Early in the process attention
is focused on the EE as something “out there.” Answers to questions will
be provided by others, bestowed on the experiencer by authorities who
20. Many thanks to EHEer Dick Richardson for sharing his clear insights over several
e-mail discussions and his willingness to help me better define the words “ineffable”and
“to know” as they might be expressed within the experiential paradigm and context.
likewise reside “out there.” The initial EE has brought the experiencer
out into the world of the weird, the curious, even the bizarre, and in that
process of stepping out the experiencer learns that he must choose,
discover a (re)solution to cognitive dissonance, in order to regain a steady
state center of operation. Once the experiencer makes a choice, he or she
is personally involved with the EE and it is no longer out there but has
to some degree become an integral part of the experience “in here.” In
effect, the EHE process has been engaged. One way or another (poten-
tiated or not) the experience has gotten under the experiencer’s skin and
cannot be erased as if it had never happened. Questions raised become
transformed into conscious choices made to dig and stretch, to discover
and find answers about the self, reality, and meaning. Whereas the EE
brought the experiencer out into the outer world, the search for meaning
brings the experiencer relatively deeper inside into the inner world. At
each critical juncture (staged or reiterative) the experiencer has been
challenged, and exists on the horns of another dilemma. For not only are
the everyday and the exceptional worlds at odds, so too is the presentation
of self (the persona) at odds with the inner self who has since accepted,
integrated, and evolved to the role of exceptional experiencer.
At every critical juncture the experiencer must decide which world to
value, which self is more authentic, in which direction to move, and how
to regain a sense of balance between all of the worlds that present
themselves dynamically, organically, including those of the perceived
past, present, and future. Each decision made is an effort to close the gap,
to resolve a cognitive dissonance between the worlds (world views), to
patch a hole in the fabric of one’s life and perspective of reality. As we
have seen, EEs by their very definition can create a mighty big hole in
that fabric to mend. Yet EEs may become more easily recognized as one’s
attention-perceptual threshold for EEs in general is lowered with repe-
tition and intensity, and as the evaluative-decision threshold to potenti-
ate, to make conscious choices about them, moves likewise. Together
these lowering thresholds can allow the experiencer more room to
navigate the challenges of EEs, more or less as needed. By itself this and
reiterative feedback loops, may be viewed as a form of creative resolution,
a triangulated higher-order gestalt constructed between the choices of
the matter(s) presented. In this case each of these gestalts become a
hybrid form of EE transmutation of the experience (i.e., an eureka
insight) complete with narrative reports of new realizations and aware-
ness gained. But even for the evolved EEer, the worlds discovered and
represented thus far continue to remain a patchwork, a world of attempts
to fill the holes and knit the fabric of life, meaning, reality back together.
As long as the experiencer attempts to fill in and patch the holes, one’s
ongoing creation will still build “up” from a series of either/or choices
in which the EEer weighs one world against the other, as the challenges
of each new EE are perceived and met. Theoretically, the farthest
distance an experiencer can travel in this scenario is Stage 3; perpetually
choosing one of two worlds and dynamically creating a patchwork
representation of an intricately-patterned hybrid world, ad infinitum,
until the next EE or life challenge appears tantalizingly within reach.
As we have seen, the human story requires, at minimum, one experi-
ence that transports the experiencer into the experiential paradigm in
which the “whole” fabric of reality is “Known” all at once, seemingly,
and seamed in a cosmic flash. At this juncture of realization and aware-
ness, the experiencer and the experience merge and unite, and the EHE
process dynamically switches direction. Rather than building “up” to
something based on an EE or a series of EEs, the EHE moment of the
experiential paradigm is apprehended, conveyed back home, “down” into
the experiencer’s center of internal operations, Stage 3. The “Known”
more than fills any remaining holes in the constructed fabric and then
some more. That “more” is the gift of the experiential paradigm in which,
from that point on, “Home” and “home” are known to be the same at
any moment in spacetime on which the experiencer chooses to focus.
From there/here on out and back, the challenge for the experiencer will
be to keep (paradoxically, by not keeping) “Home” and “home” aligned,
in phase, and in process, continuing to dynamically move and adjust as
needed. The EE that engaged the “call” has become transmuted, an EHE
“entity” in its own right, and the EEer has been transformed into an
EHEer “entity” in his or her own right. Paradoxically, there is no
difference between them, nor between the EHE process (“entity”) that
had conveyed or conveys them. Thus Stage 5, a new way of being in the
world perpetually becomes, and is the EHEer’s embodied answer to the
call that, in retrospective narrative reports, he or she now clearly recog-
nizes had been the one calling all along.
Summary
One-by-one experiencers from all walks of life are exploring the
depths of inner space and the heights of outer space and have come back
home to tell about it — to live and embody what they have found for
themselves to be true, truth, reality. Each finds his or her uniquely
individual way, and although the initiating EEs do vary, the stories and
the narrative “maps” taken together are remarkably more similar than
different, particularly in the case in which we compare (overlay) narrative
detail and major themes submitted by EHEer-explorers.
When we consider that Exceptional Experiencers and Exceptional
Human Experiencers are our present-day explorers, discovering un-
charted land forms (staging areas), and navigating routes (processes)
between them, then each narrative serves as a map of these new territo-
ries, as well as a detailed captain’s log chronicling events of the journey.
Even meticulous study of only 50 EE/EHE accounts and autobiogra-
phies can yield well over 1000 pieces of characteristic detail that can then
be collated and overlaid onto a preliminary map. As such, the distin-
guishing features of each of the land forms (the prevailing themes) and
the processional events as experienced are taken together as patterns, and
begin to take on an aggregate shape, to refine contours, and to offer a
manifest record for other explorers who may choose to follow.
The matrix model and explorers’ map presented here is but one effort
to gather and illustrate these charted landmarks and routes of the EHE
process. Regardless of an individual EEer’s originating port of call (the
initiating EE, the perceived anomaly), any of over 100 different types
could serve as a potential entry point into an EHE. Based on White’s
general EHE theory, exceptional experiences can range from the simply
odd to the incredibly bizarre, from the sacred to the profane, and indeed
cover all the points and routes in between when viewed across the
extensive array of experiencer narratives. These individual reports re-
main a rich, largely-untapped resource. They offer incredible depth and
breadth into the mysteries of human potential and the evolution of
conscious awareness.
From all cultures and across all times, the perennial story of EHE has
been told and passed down in various forms through generations of
explorers curious enough to ask questions beyond the status quo. I
sincerely hope that readers will discover something of value within these
pages, and feel free to add, subtract, or modify the preliminary EHE
process model and map by virtue of their own unique talents and
explorations.
References
Arcangel, D. (1997). Investigating the relationship between the Myers-Briggs Type

Indicator and facilitated reunion experiences. Journal of the American Society for
Psychical Research, 91, 82-95.
Boring, E. G. (1957). A history of experimental psychology. NY: Appleton-Century-
Crofts.
Brown, S. V. (1995). Recollections on life: Finding meaning within exceptional
human experience. Exceptional Human Experience, 13, 1-9.
Brown, S. V. (1997a). The EHE process: The objective standpoint. In R. A. White
(Ed.), Exceptional human experience: Background papers II (pp. 51-52). New Bern,
NC: EHE Network.
Brown, S. V. (1997b). Exceptional human experiences: Rethinking anomalies and
shifting paradigms: An introduction and background paper. In R. A. White (Ed.),
Exceptional human experience: Background papers II (pp. 21-26). New Bern, NC:
EHE Network.
Brown, S. V. (1997c). Helpful steps in writing an EHE autobiography. In R. A. White
NC: EHE Network.
Brown, S. V. (1997d). How to write an EHE account: Getting started. In R. A. White
NC: EHE Network.
Brown, S. V., & White, R. A. (1997). Triggers, concomitants, and aftereffects of
EHEs: Brief summary of the IONS-TCA study. In R. A. White (Ed.), Exceptional
human experience: Background papers II (pp. 150-156). New Bern, NC: EHE
Network.
Cortright, B. (1997). Psychotherapy and spirit: Theory and practice in transpersonal
psychology. Albany: SUNY Press.
Gendlin, E. (1997). Experiencing and the creation of meaning: A philosophical and
psychological approach to the subjective. Chicago: Northwestern University Press.
Green, D. M., & Swets, J. A. (1966). A signal detection theory and psychophysics. NY:
Wiley.
Jung, C. G. (1954). The development of the personality. (Collected Works of C. G. Jung,
Vol. 16). New York: Pantheon. (Originally published in 1934.)
Keirsey, D., & Bates, M. (1984). Please understand me: Character and temperament types
(4th ed.). Del Mar, CA: Gnosology Books.
Klatsky, R. L. (1975). Human memory: Structure and process. San Francisco: W. H.
Freeman & Co.
Krippner, S. (1984). A systems approach to psi research based upon Jungian typology.
In R. A. White & R. S. Broughton (Eds.), Research in parapsychology 1983 (pp.
153-166). Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press.
McCaulley, M. H. (1981). Jung’s theory of psychological types and the Myers-Briggs Type
Indicator. Gainesville, FL: Center for Application of Psychological Type.
Myers, I. B., McCaulley, M. H., Quenk, N. L., & Hammer, A. L. (1998). MBTI
manual: A guide to the development and use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (3rd
ed.). Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Peters, R. S. (1965). Twentieth century theories. In R. S. Peters (Ed.), Brett’s history
of psychology (pp. 691-762). (Rev. ed.) Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Reed, H. (1997). Introduction to transpersonal studies: A description of a new
approach to integrating science, religion, and spirituality. In R. A. White (Ed.),
EHE Network
Rosen, S. M. (1994). Science, paradox, and the Moebius principle: The evolution of a
“transcultural” approach to wholeness. Albany: SUNY Press.
van Sant, S. (1999). Psychological type and a Jungian approach to transitions (trauma,
treadmill, or transformation?). Proceedings of the second biennial clinical conference
of the Center for Applications of Psychological Type (pp. 125-132). Gainesville, FL:
Center for Applications of Psychological Type.
Wade, J. (1996). Changes of mind: A holonomic theory of the evolution of consciousness.
Albany: SUNY Press.
White, R. A. (1990). An experience-centered approach to parapsychology. Excep-
tional Human Experience, 8, 7-36.
White, R. A. (1994). Exceptional human experience database project. In R. A. White
(Ed.), Exceptional human experience: Background papers (pp. 146-148). Dix Hills,
NY: EHE Network.
White, R. A. (1997a). The EHE process: the subjective standpoint. In R. A. White
NC: EHE Network.
White, R. A. (1997b). How to write an EHE autobiography (2nd ed.). In R. A. White
NC: EHE Network.
White, R. A. (1997c). List of potential exceptional human experiences. In R. A.
White (Ed.), Exceptional human experience: Background papers II (pp. 41-43). New
Bern, NC: EHE Network.
White, R. A. (1997d). My EHE odyssey: An ongoing process of formulation. In R.
A. White (Ed.), Exceptional human experience: Background papers II (pp. 137-138).
New Bern, NC: EHE Network.
White, R. A. (1998a). Genetic guidance, parapsychology, and psi. In N. L. Zingrone,
M. J. Schlitz, C. S. Alvarado & J. Milton (Eds.), Research in parapsychology, 1993
(pp. 194-212). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
White, R. A. (1998b). Becoming more human as we work: The reflexive role of
exceptional human experience. In W. G. Braud & R. Anderson (Comps.) Hon-
oring human experience: Transpersonal research methods for the social sciences (pp.
128-145). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
White, R. A. (1999). EHE Network news: Cooperation of the EHE Network and
the William James Varieties Centennial Committee. EHE News, 6, 15-16.
White, R. A., & Brown, S. V. (1997). Classes of EEs/EHEs. In R. A. White (Ed.),
EHE Network.
Abstract
The Exceptional Human Experience (EHE) process is a unique, dy-
namic, progressive, reiterative, evolving pattern of human consciousness
development initiated by an anomalous experience and evidenced by expand-
ing levels of reported inner and outer transpersonal awareness. This paper is
based on a review of hundreds of experiencer first-person written narratives
solicited by Rhea White and the EHE Network over the past decade. It
presents an orthogonal expansion of our original 5-stage EHE process
outline. The expanded model highlights a 5-stage x 12-classifier matrix
design, including 60 unique cells into which characteristics synthesized
across, and detailed within, experiencer narratives can be captured and
mapped. The matrix model offers both a tool for researchers, in the form of
a classification grid, as well as a map of key features noted and synthesized
across, and within, each of the stages of the EHE process. The discussion
fleshes out some of the key issues for each of the stages. In addition, the
discussion speaks to the overarching processional interactions between stages
with a focus toward furthering exploration, research, and application.
Résumé
Au début des années 90, Rhea White a entrepris d’étendre et de docu-
menter sa théorie compréhensive intitulée Expériences Humaines Excep-
tionnelles. Le développement théorique, l’état des lieux des écrits et les
nombreuses références et articles scientifiques, cherchent à soutenir la thèse
selon laquelle les Expériences Exceptionnelles (EEs) peuvent être expéri-
mentées et puis intégrées dans une nouvelle vision du monde. Ce moment
d’illumination transpersonnelle agit tel un catalyseur: l’événement n’est plus
perçu comme distinct de l’expérience de l’événement, et la personne se rend
compte qu’elle fait complètement partie de la création et du déploiement de
l’EE, ce qui transmute et humanise l’expérience, la transformant en une
Expérience Humaine Exceptionnelle. Les deux expériences — exception-
nelle et humaine-exceptionnelle — font partie du même processus. Néan-
moins, ces expériences sont distinctes : l’individu qui a eu une EHE complète
a aussi agi sur l’expérience. En activant et transmutant le «dehors», ils sont
eux même transformé «dedans».
Zusammenfassung
Dieser Aufsatz beruht auf einer Durchsicht von Hunderten von
Berichten, die von den erlebenden Personen in der IchForm verfaßt und von
Rhea White und dem EHE Netzwerk während des letzten Jahrzehntes erfaßt
worden sind. Er bietet eine rechtwinkelige Erweiterung unseres originalen
Entwurfes des 5 stufigen EHE-Prozesses. Das expandierte Modell hebt die
Gestaltung einer Matrix von 5 Stadien sowie 12 Klassifikatoren hervor, somit
60 einzelne Zellen, in denen die Erlebnisberichte erfaßt und dargestellt
werden können: bis in die Einzelheiten beschrieben, aber die Charakteristika
übergreifend synthetisiert. Dieses Matrix-Modell bietet sowohl ein
Werkzeug für Forscher, in der Form eines Koordinatennetzes der Klassifi-
kation, wie auch eine Abbildung der Hauptmerkmale, die festgestellt und
über die Stadien des EHE-Prozesses hinweg, aber auch innerhalb eines jeden
derselben synthetisiert worden sind. Die Diskussion hebt einige der Kern-
hemen für jedes der Stadien hervor. Weiters spricht die Diskussion die
überspannenden prozeßhaften Interaktionen zwischen den Stadien an, mit
dem Fokus auf der Förderung von Erforschung, Untersuchung und Anwen-
dung.
Sommario
Questo lavoro si fonda su una rassegna di centinaia di testimonianze
scritte, fornite negli ultimi dieci anni dietro sollecitazione di Rhea White e
dall’EHE Network, e presenta un’espansione ortogonale del nostro modello
originale a 5 stadi del processo EHE (Esperienze Umane Eccezionali). Il
modello ampliato consiste in una matrice di 5 stadi per 12 classificazioni, nelle
cui 60 celle individuali si possono includere e mappare le varie caratteristiche
sintetizzate da più esperienze o estratte in dettaglio dalle singole narrazioni.
Il modello a matrice si offre come uno strumento per i ricercatori, nella forma
di griglia di classificazione, ma anche come mappa delle caratteristiche-chiave
notate e riprese in forma sintetica sia dall’insieme delle varie fasi sia all’interno
dei singoli stadi del processo EHE. La discussione dettaglia alcune questioni
di primaria importanza per ciascuno degli stadi e illustra le interazioni tra i
processi dei vari stadi, nell’ottica di ulteriori esplorazioni, ricerche e appli-
cazioni.
Resumo
Este artigo baseia-se na revisão de centenas de narrativas escritas por
pessoas que vivenciaram as experiências solicitadas por Rhea White e pela
EHE Network na última década. Apresenta uma expansão ortogonal de nosso
primeiro esboço de 5 etapas do processo de experiências humanas excepcio-
nais (EHEs). A nova versão do modelo destaca um esquema de 5 etapas x 12
classificadores, incluindo 60 células de características nos diferentes níveis.
Nesse esquema, as narrativas das experiências são apresentadas e ordenadas.
Esse modelo oferece uma ferramenta para a pesquisa na forma de uma grade
de classificação, e um mapa de características-chave entre e dentro de cada
uma das etapas do processo das EHEs. A discussão traz maiores detalhes a
respeito dos principais aspectos de cada etapa. Além disso, o artigo também
discute as interações dos processos entre as etapas, dando ênfase à exploração,
pesquisa e aplicação dessas idéias.
Resumen
Este artículo está basado en una revisión de cientos de narrativas de
experiencias escritas por las personas que tuvieron las experiencias solicitadas
por Rhea White y el EHE Network durante la década pasada. Se presenta
una expansión ortogonal de nuestro sistema de cinco etapas del proceso de
experiencias humanas excepcionales (EHE). La nueva versión del modelo
enfatiza un diseño de cinco etapas x 12 clasificaciones, incluyendo 60 celdas
de características en los diferentes niveles, en el cual se exponen y se ordenan
las narrativas de las experiencias. El modelo ofrece una herramienta para la
investigación, en forma de un marco de clasificación, y un mapa de las
características principales entre y dentro de cada una de las etapas del proceso
de EHEs. La discusión ofrece detalles de los aspectos principales de cada
etapa. También se discuten las interacciones de los procesos entre las etapas
con énfasis en asistir la exploración, investigación, y aplicación de estas ideas.

Human Experience Process

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Human Experience Process

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Human Experience Process

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Parapsychology © 2000 Parapsychology Foundation, Inc.

The Exceptional Human Experience Process:

In the early 1990s, Rhea A. White began extensive formal develop-

1. Exceptional Human Experience (EHE) theoretical and background materials can be

Evolution of the EHE Process Model

By initially designating five hypothetical stages and outlining their

1. Definition — A synthesized description of the stage gleaned from

experiencers’ stated aftereffects (their tracks) gleaned from report essays.

A Matrix Model of the EHE Process

Stage 1: The Initiating Event/Experience

Stage 2: Search for Reconciliation

Stage 3: Between Two Worlds

Stage 4: In the Experiential Paradigm

Stage 5: A New Way of Being in the World

1. Each stage may be viewed as a “staging area of operations flow”

7. Language in the advanced stages of EHE is more “fuzzy” than

Stage 1: The Initiating Event/Experience

What was it about that particular event that brought it to the

Stage 2: The Search for Reconciliation

12. Charles Tart states that his website, http://www.issc-taste.org/ or “T.A.S.T.E.”

Stage 3: Between Two Worlds

Stage 4: In the Experiential Paradigm

Stage 5: A New Way of Being in the World

Arcangel, D. (1997). Investigating the relationship between the Myers-Briggs Type

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.