[Keith]
I haven't read *Kosmic Consciousness* & don't think much of a *Brief History
of Everything*, either. The former is dated and the latter is too
superficial. I do find value in SES, though. Wilber has transcended even
some of his thinking in SES, though, from what I'm reading of his works now.
I think the progression in his thinking may be part of the problem here, as
he's gone through at least 5 versions of his philosophy and some of his
earlier work he no longer identifies as complete. See the "5 Phases" at
<http://www.integralworld.net/index.html?kofman.html>
[Krimel]
I have heard the five stages business and I have also heard him say how
consistent his early stuff is too and I agree to the extent that he has been
consistently wrong.
[Keithe]
Wilber identifies holarchies as one type of hierarchy--there are others.
Regardless, I think Wilber sees *everything* as a manifestation of Spirit,
not just the inorganic levels. The rational level does arise from lower
levels, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't also aim toward Spirit. For
Wilber, Spirit is the Ground of all Being, just as for Pirsig, Quality is
the Ground of all Becoming. Everything arises from Quality, and evolves
toward Quality. Everything arises from Spirit, and evolves toward Spirit. I
see Wilber's evolutionary holarchy is, in many respects, similar to Pirsig's
evolutionary hierarchy of moral levels.
[Keith]
He thinks everything is spirit then works out a system that he thinks revels
Spirit. What a coincidence. This is exactly the sort of thing Kohlberg and
Gilligan have been criticized for doing.
But once again according to his holarchical model this would make Spirit
very fundamental but not particularly relevant.
[Keith]
You may well be right, but I don't have the mathematical background to say.
I do readily admit that Wilber's terminology is confusing, as he uses Spirit
many different ways. I think this is an enormous mistake in making his
system easily comprehensible. He talks about Spirit as the Ground of all
Being, as I just described, then he describes alternate states of
consciousness, some of which may be called "spiritual" I suppose because
they put you in disintermediated contact with Spirit, then he has a
"spiritual" line of development in his psychology, which I can't say makes
much sense to me just now.
[Krimel]
They teach set theory in elementary school now I think, certainly by middle
school. Venn diagrams and overlapping circles to show the union of sets and
such. He claims that because all these "traditions" refer to spiritual
matter we should swallow them hook line and sinker. But for no particular
reason I can tell other that veneration of history.
[Keith]
Wilber doesn't claim that any supernatural agencies result in altered states
of consciousness. He readily admits that there are brain state changes
associated with meditative practice and the other ways of achieving altered
conscious states. These are the Right-Hand "exterior" correlates of the
Left-Hand "interior" states (qualia?) of consciousness. For Wilber, though,
consciousness is not an epiphenomenon of the brain. He's not a materialist.
Instead, he believes that consciousness ("interiority") extends down the
holarchic chain. It is, in some sense, a primal characteristic of Spirit.
[Krimel]
If Spirit is the undetected principle underlying matter and consciousness is
not dependant on brain states only correlated to them how can he claim this
is not supernatural?
[Keith]
Wilber indeed co-opts Piaget, but then that's his whole program. Like
Pirsig, he's a grand synthesizer.
[Krimel]
These are Piaget's stages of intellectual development:
The child, through physical interaction with his or her environment, builds
a set of concepts about reality and how it works.
Sensorimotor stage
(birth - 2 years old)
-- This is the stage where a child does not know that physical objects
remain in existence even when out of sight (object permanance).
Preoperational stage (ages 2-7)
--The child is not yet able to conceptualize abstractly and needs concrete
physical situations.
Concrete operations (ages 7-11)
--As physical experience accumulates, the child starts to conceptualize,
creating logical structures that explain his or her physical experiences.
Abstract problem solving is also possible at this stage. For example,
arithmetic equations can be solved with numbers, not just with objects.
Formal operations (beginning at ages 11-15)
--By this point, the child's cognitive structures are like those of an adult
and include conceptual reasoning.
Notice the progression from focus on the internal world of unity on oneness;
to progressive stages of recognizing objects and others as distinct
entities; the ability to view things from different perspectives and finally
complex symbol manipulation.
We even name these stages of consciousness in our society. We call it First
Grade, Second Grade... But we general dispense with the color coding except
perhaps in the lower grades.
[Keith]
Since Spirit is the Ground of All Being, it transcends everything. That's
how I understand Wilber. Spirit is not a higher level of consciousness, it's
the Ground from which all manifestation arises.
[Krimel]
Why is this important? What does it add to our understanding of particle
physics which should be the next step up. What does is explain about
particle physics that is missing with out it?
[Keith]
That said, I have a tough time with Wilber's transrational bent. However,
remember that Pirsig's project in *ZMM* was to "expand the nature of
rationality". I think that Wilber is working on something of a similar
project. Higher states of consciousness continue to include prior levels of
rational thought, they just aren't locked into strict identification with
it.
[Krimel]
But one can as easily say that rational thought transcends and includes
"higher" states of consciousness. This is the direction that Piaget's work
points toward. Even taking the Witness along on these trips to higher
consciousness suggests that they need to be recorded and put into some kind
of verbal structure to be relevant. This at least to my way of thinking
makes the rationalization of these states transendant.
[Keith]
I'm not entirely sure how to understand the Wilber quote you give above. Can
you provide a page number reference?
{Krimel}
It is several paragraphs into chapter 6 Pre/Trans Fallacy.
[Keith]
It's arguable those represent higher forms of consciousness. They certainly
expand the realm of what one can be conscious of, but whether they lead to
higher levels of consciousness ...
[Krimel]
Consider that level of consciousness and understand that Newton needed to
invent calculus and the laws of motion. Consider Pirsig's assessment of Bohr
and Heisenberg working as artists on quantum mechanics.
[Keith]
Not levels, states, and definitely not higher, just different. Take a look
at the picture you deride: Gross (waking), Subtle (dreaming), Causal
(dreamless sleep), & Nondual ("union"). Those are different states of
consciousness, not stages of development in his system. That's why they're
shown horizontally arranged, not vertically. None of them are any higher
than the other.
[Krimel]
Where I come from sleep is not a higher state of consciousness than waking.
What makes these states higher in Wilber's view are disciplines that allow
one to carry awareness into these states. Again this is taking the rational
awareness into these typically unconscious states. This is a clear and
specific case of Wilber having his hierarchy ass backwards.
[Keith]
Oh please! We're here debating the merits of a system that denies widely
accepted views of reality and replaces them with little dharmas everywhere
all part of one mystic Quality. Pirsig denies objective reality, the
ontological existence of space and time, etc. Wilber's system may be "out
there" (and I certainly don't subscribe to all of it), but if one can take
Pirsig seriously, one can take Wilber seriously.
[Krimel]
Well I don't see Pirsig's philosophy as working that way. There are
similarities between the two and there are aspects of Wilber that are less
obnoxious than others.
As I have said many times, I see Pirsig as offering up westernized Taoism.
Taoism provides a metaphysical under pinning for Zen. It is Zen minus the
mysticism.
[Keith]
I happen to find value in the distinctions that Wilber makes. While Pirsig's
evolutionary levels are great orienting generalizations, they aren't
fine-grained enough to allow one to gain traction in evaluating many
situations. Wilber's use of Piaget and Spiral Dynamics & other developmental
theories give a very useful vocabulary for exploring both inter- and
intra-level value conflicts within Pirsig's social and intellectual levels.
[Krimel]
I think Pirsig's system provides what is essential in understanding any
situation. You need to know what is likely to change and what is likely to
hold still. What is static and what is dynamic. If you can figure that out,
you will have a handle in the probable state of affairs in the future. You
won't know exactly because the future is undefined.
moq_discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
