Senses themselves have a history and differ across lifeworlds.

Evidence

One should not take this to mean that the worldliness of the secular members of modern nations is an expression of the truth revealed through the human senses, since senses themselves have a history. … Allegiance demanded of them was solely to Christ and through him to other Christians. — Talal Asad, Formations of the Secular, 944 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

One should not take this to mean that the worldliness of the secular members of modern nations is an expression of the truth revealed through the human senses, since senses themselves have a history. However unworldly medieval Christian monks and nuns may have been, they too lived in the world (where else?), but they lived differently in it from laypersons. … Benedict Anderson quite rightly represents the worldliness of secular nationalism as a specific ideological construct (no less ideological than the one it replaces) that includes in the present an imagined realm of the nation as a community with a “worldly past.” — Talal Asad, Formations of the Secular, 944 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Senses are not subjective channels but objective rules of worldly revelation. — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 856; Taste registers historical experience because the individual is itself a historical product — Theodor W. Adorno, Minima Moralia: Reflections from…, 167; Cross-cultural encounters reveal that one’s own life-world is not beyond question — Sarah Bakewell, At the Existentialist Café: Freedom,…, 428 (+6 more)

Broader Connections

• Even the senses have a history, so secular worldliness is not brute sense-truth #corroborates (0.97) — Talal Asad, Formations of the Secular, 944
• Even the senses have a history, so secular worldliness is ideological too #corroborates (0.95) — Talal Asad, Formations of the Secular, 944