This is a book that is being published, as an experiment, on Medium.com. This particular dialog is part of the “Proem” of the book, which lays out the philosophical adjustments needed to understand what the book is about. It’s not positing a new philosophy, but rather deconstructing all the things that we have all heard throughout our lives and have taken to heart.

The particular word, “imperience,” is needed in order to distinguish that which occurs during deep states of meditation, in which the “discerning mind” is not in operation, from that which occurs in our normal daily state as we go about our lives. But it is also needful because it is not completely different from what happens throughout our day, it is just lost beneath the conceptual classifications, relation assignments, and identifications that our “discerning mind” overlays it with. You see, the word “experience” is FUBR, which is why many philosophers won’t use it.

This is all covered in an earlier dialog, Understanding Experience, in which “imperience” is defined.

In response to your comment, I have created a Glossary, and linked it to the Navigation menu under Back Matter on this medium publication.

But to save you a moment, here is the definition from that Glossary:

Imperience: (neologism)

| ˌɪmˈpirēəns | noun — The directly lived event which has affected us — it is the deeply felt presence of that which we perceive, think, emote, embody, remember and intuit, which arise as the processual unfolding phenomena of mind. Note that presence is different than meaning, or sense, or even identification. Normally, these imperiences are immediately apperceived into our understanding as experiences, i.e. identified content. ORIGIN: From Latin from in- “in” or “within,” + -peritus, “experienced” or “tested.”

Thank you for the useful comment, Victor!