Krimel's "point was that Wilber co-opts the whole body of Piagetian research
into his system ignoring the fact that Piaget's system point in a completely different direction than Wilber's own." dmb says: I don't quite understand this objection. Surely, you can't be saying that Wilber is obliged to remainful to Piaget's intentions? You can't be saying that Wilber is not allowed to take incorporate ideas and information into his worldview. What other option do any of us have? If we were obliged to remain faithful to what's come before, the world of ideas would be frozen solid. You can't be saying that. Wilber agrees with Piaget on some things and not on others. So what? Why is the problem? In what sense is that an "abuse" of ideas? I would think that sort of thing happens every day, even on weekends and holidays. [Krimel] It's a free country. Wilber can say whatever he wants. But are you saying that completely inverting the nature, direction, theoretical approach and philosophy of the man, then claiming him as an ally, is ok with you? After all you asked about my impressions of Wilber's abuse of the people he cites. Are you saying that what Wilber does with Piaget is not abusive? It's not like he ever acknowledges the differences. The truth is his mostly cites Gilligan but only after tying them together so as to imply that Gilligan is Piaget's heir apparent. 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/
