An Experience Can Come Before Its Explanation

We can describe the taste of something to a person who has never tried it. The description may help them decide whether to take a bite. It does not give them the taste itself.

A practice can have a similar gap between account and encounter. We may understand the steps of listening and discover, in a difficult conversation, how much attention they demand. We may read about a way of responding and only grasp its force when we try it with another person.

That experience can come before a good explanation of why the practice helped. It is reasonable to say, “Something changed, and I cannot yet say how.” It is less reasonable to turn that sentence into proof that the practice works for everyone, or that questions about its limits no longer matter.

Experience and explanation can correct each other. An account helps us notice what we are testing. A direct encounter may expose what the account omitted. Repetition, comparison, and feedback can tell us whether a first impression holds up.

We need not wait for a complete theory before engaging carefully with a conversation or practice. We also need not surrender our judgment because an experience felt powerful. Take the bite, attend to what happened, and keep asking what the experience can and cannot support.