Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Forgetting ourselves: epistemic costs and ethical concerns in mindfulness exercises
  1. Sahanika Ratnayake1,
  2. David Merry2
  1. 1 School of Philosophy, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia
  2. 2 Institute for Philosophy, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany
  1. Correspondence to David Merry, Institut für Philosophie, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Unter den Linden 6, 10099 Berlin, Germany; david.merry{at}


Mindfulness exercises are presented as being compatible with almost any spiritual, religious or philosophical beliefs. In this paper, we argue that they in fact involve imagining and conceptualising rather striking and controversial claims about the self, and the self’s relationship to thoughts and feelings. For this reason, practising mindfulness exercises is likely to be in tension with many people’s core beliefs and values, a tension that should be treated as a downside of therapeutic interventions involving mindfulness exercises, not unlike a side effect. Clients ought to be informed of these metaphysical aspects of the exercises, and mental health providers ought to take them into account in assessing which course of treatment to recommend. Given these concerns, the casual way in which mindfulness exercises are presently distributed by mental health providers to the general public is inappropriate.

  • psychiatry
  • psychology
  • informed consent
  • autonomy
  • moral and religious aspects

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.


  • Contributors SR contributed the initial idea for the paper and primarily wrote section 1. DM primarily wrote section 2. The content in both sections was refined through considerable discussion by both authors.

  • Funding This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Other content recommended for you